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

The sad truth about Facebook

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 127 posts

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#11

Post by starpilot »

zaidf wrote: post #5

Talk. About. A. Troll. (edit: ah, no wonder. the author is fake steve jobs blogger) This is almost as good as the article from the 90s making fun of the Internet and how useless it is. ...a place where smart kids arrive hoping to make an easy fortune building companies that seem, if not pointless, at least not as serious as, say, old-guard companies like HP, Intel, Cisco, and Apple. "Easy fortune" huh? That's what yo…

If you're not aware, most of the old guard companies pulled 15-20 hour days starting out too. And making a physical product is generally MUCH more frustrating than anything in web app land. Hurrying up and waiting, for a flawed product messed up by the machinists. Also much higher startup capital costs for anything nontrivial like semiconductors. Expensive equipment, office space, manufacturing space, all this stuff you need to start. Not just two or three guys with open source software working in a dorm.

Studying the physical sciences is also more mentally taxing than coding PHP. I've gotten paid for both. You can't compare designing aircraft in CAD and Excel (what I do) that could kill someone if done improperly, with setting up email verification for your social networking site. Not even close.

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#12

Post by zaidf »

starpilot wrote: post #11
zaidf wrote: post #5

Talk. About. A. Troll. (edit: ah, no wonder. the author is fake steve jobs blogger) This is almost as good as the article from the 90s making fun of the Internet and how useless it is. ...a place where smart kids arrive hoping to make an easy fortune building companies that seem, if not pointless, at least not as serious as, say, old-guard companies like HP, Intel, Cisco, and Apple. "Easy fortune" huh? That's what yo…

If you're not aware, most of the old guard companies pulled 15-20 hour days starting out too. And making a physical product is generally MUCH more frustrating than anything in web app land. Hurrying up and waiting, for a flawed product messed up by the machinists. Also much higher startup capital costs for anything nontrivial like semiconductors. Expensive equipment, office space, manufacturing space, all this stuff…

Nothing I said belittles the efforts of past Valley heroes.

As for it becoming cheaper to do a start-up now versus previously, well doh. That should not be an excuse to belittle today's start-ups as the author does so recklessly.

And where is the discussion headed anyways? I am sure it was harder for entrepreneurs in 1900 than 1950 on the whole.

Studying the physical sciences is also more mentally taxing than coding PHP.

You make it sound like that is all a start-up is: some php code. Most successful start-ups are a lot more than php code.

Also, having to walk ten miles before we had a means of transportation was more taxing than taking cars. What are we gonna do about that? Attack the whole world for not having it as hard as when folks had to walk 10 miles?

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#14

Post by rblion »

“the unknown engineers and professors who have good ideas. Are those people going to get funded or will they be talked out of it and told they should do something like Zynga, because virtual goods is where it’s at these days?”

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#15

Post by kiba »

starpilot wrote: post #11
zaidf wrote: post #5

Talk. About. A. Troll. (edit: ah, no wonder. the author is fake steve jobs blogger) This is almost as good as the article from the 90s making fun of the Internet and how useless it is. ...a place where smart kids arrive hoping to make an easy fortune building companies that seem, if not pointless, at least not as serious as, say, old-guard companies like HP, Intel, Cisco, and Apple. "Easy fortune" huh? That's what yo…

If you're not aware, most of the old guard companies pulled 15-20 hour days starting out too. And making a physical product is generally MUCH more frustrating than anything in web app land. Hurrying up and waiting, for a flawed product messed up by the machinists. Also much higher startup capital costs for anything nontrivial like semiconductors. Expensive equipment, office space, manufacturing space, all this stuff…

Studying the physical sciences is also more mentally taxing than coding PHP. I've gotten paid for both. You can't compare designing aircraft in CAD and Excel (what I do) that could kill someone if done improperly, with setting up email verification for your social networking site. Not even close.

You are not going to just go anywhere with just a social networking site. It's going to be much harder than that.

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#16

Post by newgrad »

iamelgringo wrote: post #6

Complete poppycock. Running Hackers and Founders SV, I think I have a pretty decent picture of what Silicon Valley is like on the ground floor, and as far as I'm concerned it's pretty frigging amazing. There's tons of small teams doing amazing things with Big Data and real time analytics like Factual (making Open Data easier to manage and use), MixPanel (Real Time analytics for applications). There's a number of comp…

The real writer, not the one who posted it on HN, probably doesn't even know this thread exists.

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#17

Post by bpm140 »

Aetius wrote: post #2

Yeah, it would be easier innovate on hard problems, Mr. Myhrvold, if you you weren't trying to strangle startups and small tech firms every chance you get with your Intellectual Ventures .

Dammit. I raced back after reading the article to post this exact statement. Once again someone beats me to the karma :)

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#19

Post by rblion »

zaidf wrote: post #5

Talk. About. A. Troll. (edit: ah, no wonder. the author is fake steve jobs blogger) This is almost as good as the article from the 90s making fun of the Internet and how useless it is. ...a place where smart kids arrive hoping to make an easy fortune building companies that seem, if not pointless, at least not as serious as, say, old-guard companies like HP, Intel, Cisco, and Apple. "Easy fortune" huh? That's what yo…

Don't shoot the messenger.

His message:

Before our arrogant, materialistic society hits the next iceberg or 'crash', it would be wise to create technology for the long-term survival of humanity and habitability of Earth. What problems are more important to solve?

"The risk is that by focusing an entire generation of bright young entrepreneurs on such silly things, we’ll fall behind in creating the fundamental building blocks of our economy. The transistor and the integrated circuit gave rise to the last half century of prosperity. But what comes next? "If we distract people with the lure of easy money, with making companies that don’t solve anything hard, we’re going to wind up derailing the thing that has been driving our economy," Myhrvold says."

Re: The sad truth about Facebook

#20

Post by zaidf »

rblion wrote: post #19
zaidf wrote: post #5

Talk. About. A. Troll. (edit: ah, no wonder. the author is fake steve jobs blogger) This is almost as good as the article from the 90s making fun of the Internet and how useless it is. ...a place where smart kids arrive hoping to make an easy fortune building companies that seem, if not pointless, at least not as serious as, say, old-guard companies like HP, Intel, Cisco, and Apple. "Easy fortune" huh? That's what yo…

Don't shoot the messenger. His message: Before our arrogant, materialistic society hits the next iceberg or 'crash', it would be wise to create technology for the long-term survival of humanity and habitability of Earth. What problems are more important to solve? "The risk is that by focusing an entire generation of bright young entrepreneurs on such silly things, we’ll fall behind in creating the fundamental buildin…

That implies:

(a) we know what comes next

(b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on

(c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us achieve (a)

Counter:

(a) we don't really know what comes next

(b) heck, we don't really know what all stuff folks are working on. Just because there are two well-known start-ups called Twitter and Facebook does not mean there aren't dozens of start-ups doing stuff with hardware and medicine. Don't blame the media's love affair with Twitter and Facebook to entrepreneurs not working on challenging stuff.

(c) Lastly, these things the author sees as play may very well have a key role in solving the problems of tomorrow.

If we distract people with the lure of easy money...

The dot-com bubble ended a long time ago.

Post reply on HN