Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ideas are not worthless

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 52 posts

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#21

Post by Hexstream »

"Well, you need to trust the seller. When you buy a subscription to a magazine or newspaper, it's because you trust the editors not to shove crap at you once they have your money. At first, you build this trust through a track record."

According to some research I read here recently, geniuses that produce lots of great output also produce lots of not-so-great output.

So, having a streak of a couple free good ideas doesn't really tell much about the value of the next for-pay idea.

Also, because of the high subjectivity, lack of tangibility and prospect of easy money, I think such a "market" would be driven by hype and corruption in general.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#23

Post by ambition »

mixmax wrote: post #11

Here's what I think: An idea by itself is worthless without execution, but definitely worth something with the right execution behind it. So you can think of an idea as a multilplier, where the better idea will give somebody skilled in execution a better output. To explain: stupid idea: x0,5 OK idea: x1 good idea: x5 great idea: x10 Now if someone good at execution starts a company with an OK idea he will make, let's…

I like this way of thinking about it. It makes intuitive sense to me.

It reframes the problem. It's about finding the optimal combination of executing team and idea, rather than about separating the value of the idea from its execution.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#24

Post by ambition »

Hexstream wrote: post #21

"Well, you need to trust the seller. When you buy a subscription to a magazine or newspaper, it's because you trust the editors not to shove crap at you once they have your money. At first, you build this trust through a track record." According to some research I read here recently, geniuses that produce lots of great output also produce lots of not-so-great output. So, having a streak of a couple free good ideas do…

That's a good point. I thought about it some more, I think we would end up with trusted idea 'editors'. Folks with no reputation would be forced to go to these high-reputation editors to resell ideas. These editors would gain reputation for their excellent judgement of ideas which they publish and sell.

I think you're right though, good ideas don't come from people with a few consistently good ideas, they come from people with thousands of ideas and the right filters in place.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#25

Post by ambition »

whacked_new wrote: post #3

The sentiment that ideas are worthless without execution is generally true. This can be easily explained, as "execution" can be broken down into two components: actions, and details. Action is obvious: no action, no product. Details, well, are "where the devil is." A really good idea will include enough details, that it spills over into "execution." It's not just an idea-market. It's an idea-market where people submi…

Effectively, what you're saying is "fuzzy" ideas have low value, and we would end up with market for full business plans.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#26

Post by m0nty »

"Ideas are not worthless."

Yes they are. They only become valuable when you work on them and make them into something people find useful. You can have a brilliant idea and watch it die on poor implementation and marketing, and a crumby one and make [m|b]illions from it. What's kind of fun and surprising about the Web 2.0 phenomenon is watching apparently weak ideas taking on a life of their own and becoming something interesting and useful.

Anyway, regardless of the merit of an idea in itself, can we all agree it's getting a bit tedious when people come to YC news and say "I've got a fabulous idea but no programming skills and I'd like to know where to take it. BTW, I won't tell you what it is"? I'd characterise that as attention seeking or border-line trolling.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#27

Post by ambition »

murrayh wrote: post #5

An interesting analysis. I agree that ideas are valuable, and after considering the issue, probably the only reason they have a market value of zero is because there is no good way to trade them. I think you are on the right track with your proposed solution, but I think we can improve it: Basically, ideas are interesting. If you publish ideas, a lot of people would go and read them. So there is your market. And you…

I agree there are difficult issues, this thread has unearthed several!

I will be honest though -- I thought of this in the context of poppysan's post, in which he or she claimed significantly greater-than-zero value for an idea. My own personal philosophy would be opposed to the idea market I proposed above, though. I believe that if someone is unable to execute on an idea, they should give it away. For that reason, I'd be unable to execute on constructing an idea market. My heart wouldn't be in it.

If you do play with it, I bet many people here would be interested in the result.

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#28

Post by chaostheory »

Malcx wrote: post #12
mixmax wrote: post #11

Here's what I think: An idea by itself is worthless without execution, but definitely worth something with the right execution behind it. So you can think of an idea as a multilplier, where the better idea will give somebody skilled in execution a better output. To explain: stupid idea: x0,5 OK idea: x1 good idea: x5 great idea: x10 Now if someone good at execution starts a company with an OK idea he will make, let's…

http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2005/08/ideas_are_just...

u should post this as a normal yc post; never seen it before

Re: Ideas are not worthless

#30

Post by Jd »

ambition wrote: post #27
murrayh wrote: post #5

An interesting analysis. I agree that ideas are valuable, and after considering the issue, probably the only reason they have a market value of zero is because there is no good way to trade them. I think you are on the right track with your proposed solution, but I think we can improve it: Basically, ideas are interesting. If you publish ideas, a lot of people would go and read them. So there is your market. And you…

I agree there are difficult issues, this thread has unearthed several! I will be honest though -- I thought of this in the context of poppysan's post, in which he or she claimed significantly greater-than-zero value for an idea. My own personal philosophy would be opposed to the idea market I proposed above, though. I believe that if someone is unable to execute on an idea, they should give it away. For that reason,…

Ideas of people have a history of execution are worthwhile. Also, these people may vet ideas proposed by others. This is essentially how YC works -- the prototype is the idea displayed, not executed -- PG is the veter.

One can simply move this to an earlier stage. One must establish oneself (or one's group) as an expert in a specific area, then have persons submit their ideas to your organization. You review them, and offer them to sale to interested parties.

This is essentially how VC works but I believe it could be re-encapsulated at an earlier stage, esp. with software engineering projects which are primarily idea drivien.

To the doubters out there, this is simply specialization of labor in a growing industry. Not everyone should attempt to do anything. Compare journalism. Editors, Writers, Editoralists, Proof Readers, Managers. All work to some degree with the text. We have only one job at the moment - coder/programmer.

It is time to take this to the next stage.

Post reply on HN