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

Principles for Making New Things (2008)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#21

Post by edanm »

jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

That's alway the question when listening to authors/bloggers: do they just write well? Or do they actually know what they're talking about? One of the reasons I love Stack Overflow was that it was a validation of many years spent listening to Jeff and Joel: turned out they do know how to create wonderful (and very successful) programs.

YCombinator does seem more successful than you mention though: they've turned out a lot of companies that, while not always huge, are making money. A few of them are even game-changers in their industries, like Scrib, Posterous, Justin.tv, Dropbox.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#22

Post by ceci »

jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

Nice valid points you have made here. But, i still think looking for small overlooked problem to solve in what ever sphere of life can be a science that is repeatable. If you add good execution, good product marketing and the right company culture on top of providing the tool to solve the over looked problem.

Were there no mp3 players b4 Ipod. Was there no Lotus 1-2-3 b4 excel spreedsheet. Were there no other search engines prior to google. So really providing the best tool to solve the problem is not enough to guarantee success.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#24

Post by bootload »

jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

"... So how do you define success? Is Arc successful if you open a web page and then 30 minutes later try to submit a form and get "unknown link" or something to that effect. ..."

I observed this in 2007FEB22 , you can see it here ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/398269769/ and the classic response ... "... wouldn't have been a timeout; we probably restarted the server ..."

Though I wouldn't call a broken piece of a webapp (hackernews) a failure of Arc.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#25

Post by Ardit20 »

jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

Well, he can only give his opinions, based hopefully on his experience. The best way to find out is perhaps to build your own experience, do your own trial and errors and see what works for you. Then maybe you are in a position to judge as to whether it is merely feel good talk or it actually has substance to it.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#26

Post by Vicarious »

pg's modus operandi seems to be almost exactly opposite to the prevalent style in academia.

  I like to find (a) simple solutions (b) to overlooked   
  problems (c) that actually need to be solved, and (d)    
  deliver them as informally as possible, (e) starting with a   
  very crude version 1, then (f) iterating rapidly.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#27

Post by dpatru »

pinkode wrote: post #5

Here it is: I like to find (a) simple solutions (b) to overlooked problems (c) that actually need to be solved, and (d) deliver them as informally as possible, (e) starting with a very crude version 1, then (f) iterating rapidly. Ughh, easier to say than find! :) There are thousands of very, very, very smart people running around looking for "simple solutions to overlooked problems". I like to ask entrepreneurs what…

> There are thousands of very, very, very smart people running around looking for "simple solutions to overlooked problems".

I don't think you have reason to be so pessimistic. Sal Khan, maker of Khan Academy, mentioned in an interview that while a lot of people were predicting that efforts like Khan Academy would spring up, in fact, there are very few of them that had. Sal is just one guy, who up until recently was working part-time and unfunded, who now has the largest private tutoring service in the world. This during a time when thousands of "smart" people funded by billions of dollars were ostensibly trying to do something similar. The number of people who actually start working on solutions is orders of magnitude smaller than people who are merely "looking for" solutions.

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#28

Post by 10ren »

bootload wrote: post #24
jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

"... So how do you define success? Is Arc successful if you open a web page and then 30 minutes later try to submit a form and get "unknown link" or something to that effect. ..." I observed this in 2007FEB22 , you can see it here ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/398269769/ and the classic response ... "... wouldn't have been a timeout; we probably restarted the server ..." Though I wouldn't call a broken piec…

I agree, it's not Arc, it's the webapp. And it does seem bizarrely unprofessional (I often consider my comments for a long time, so I almost always get the timeout - I'm being punished for thinking!). There also had to be a substantial outcry before we got a "search" link.

Yet... HN grows and grows... it is reported widely... luminaries routinely post here... and here are you and I.

pg has said he is careful to focus on what matters (eg. spam; ranking), not what seems to. It appears to be working. And it exactly supports this essay's thesis, of working on looking professional vs. what's important. Maybe it's a bit like undergraduates handing in essays in a fancy folder?

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#29

Post by 10ren »

jacksoncarter wrote: post #16

Reddit is a classic example of this approach. When Reddit first launched, it seemed like there was nothing to it. To the graphically unsophisticated its deliberately minimal design seemed like no design at all. But Reddit solved the real problem, which was to tell people what was new and otherwise stay out of the way. As a result it became massively successful. I'm not quite sure Reddit is exactly "massively successf…

This essay is mainly based on the common folk wisdom that you see everywhere, on iteration and solving the actual problem: 37signals. Steve Blank. Fred Brooks. esr. extreme programming. Moore. In Search of Excellence. Linus. [off the top of my head]

Reddit is successful, in that it's valued by many. It was successful for the founders [I'd dearly like to know how much they got, to an order of magnitude]. It's only 5 years old - it took Amazon 10 years to become profitable, google began in 1996 was incorporated in 1998, but didn't even start serving ads til 2000 - which accounts for almost all revenue today. So I think it's too early to call reddit "not very successful". [It would be interesting to have data on how long it typically takes for "successful" startups to become successful.]

I do disagree with pg that the essence of reddit was "to tell people what was new". Slashdot already did that and other news sites. Reddit's (and Digg's) innovation was that everyone could vote on comments. [But pg has far better information on reddit than me, so I'm left wondering why he thinks that...]

Re: Principles for Making New Things (2008)

#30

Post by watmough »

gosub wrote: post #23
watmough wrote: post #9

For me, the main corollary of this essay is that individuals in small groups have much more power and leverage than people might think. You really do just need a good idea.

and perseverance.

Yeah, that definitely shouldn't be underestimated. Even launching a simple web-site demands a fair amount of time in support and promotion and maintenance, which you just can't blow off.
Post reply on HN