The Lesson to Unlearn • Hacker News Board

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#241

Post by brlewis » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

ziadbc wrote: post #162

adwn wrote: post #133

> The way you get lots of users is to make the product really great. That is wrong – or, at the very least, incomplete. "Build it and they will come" is the dream and misconception of every programmer who's talented at software development but not at sales. Hell, this is the number one advice of every business how-to book ever: You can't rely on people finding out about your great product by chance, you need to put i…

"Make people want something that is actually junk." doesn't have quite the same ring to it, nor does it sound remotely more plausible. Presumably the 10% weekly growth that YC and PG advocate as the default growth metric isn't expected to be in the absence of sales but the contrary, sales plus anything that works that is ethical and not some ponzi scheme. He provided examples via the link to http://paulgraham.com/ds.…

I skimmed that essay. Zealous activities to make existing users happy seemed to be the emphasis. It's possible that there were zealous activities for acquiring users mentioned somewhere, but I missed them because they were less emphasized.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#242

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

hooande wrote: post #106

I know that learning how to hack systems is valuable because that's how I got into YCombinator. I set out specifically to hack the application process and succeeded. It wasn't even that difficult to do. If pg believes what he's saying in this essay, I have two questions: 1. why did he design a testing system that was easily hacked? 2. why does YCombinator itself focus so much on hacking the venture capital system, as…

My take on this:

Having a great product, building things people want (i.e. the "non-hackable" parts of building a startup) are necessary but not sufficient requirements for building a successful startup. What YC tries to teach is all the other parts (how to deal with VCs, what metrics to focus on, how to manage your time, etc.) that are also necessary, but not the core of what makes a good company. These are the "hackable" parts if you will. But you're very likely to be unsuccessful if you only have those hackable parts right, but still don't have a product people find useful and want to buy.

Since you're not posting anonymously, I'd be curious if you could offer more information on what parts of YC you think you hacked, and how your startup turned out.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#243

Post by chubot » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:17 PM UTC

paulsutter wrote: post #223

hooande wrote: post #106

I know that learning how to hack systems is valuable because that's how I got into YCombinator. I set out specifically to hack the application process and succeeded. It wasn't even that difficult to do. If pg believes what he's saying in this essay, I have two questions: 1. why did he design a testing system that was easily hacked? 2. why does YCombinator itself focus so much on hacking the venture capital system, as…

pg’s articles are all about how to build a great product (Startup=Growth, for example). Are these VC tips-and-tricks secret insider-only info? They don’t publish anything like that > YCombinator was (in 2008) oriented around learning what magic words to say to investors and exactly when to time techcrunch launch articles, etc. There seemed to be no time given to "how to make a great product”

Check out their advice on startup school, e.g. the "fundraising" section:

https://www.startupschool.org/library

I've watched many of the videos on YouTube. I would say that each speaker consistently emphasizes the need to "build something users want" before making a big press launch, before applying growth hacking techniques, before talking to investors, etc.

They always say that in the first 5 minutes of the talk, and then go onto more tactical stuff.

They do teach you about hacking investors, or maybe more charitably seeing it from their side, and seeing their motivations.

I think it's true that you can't teach the "build something users want" part, so a lot of the advice is lower level than that.

Advice about building things tends to sound very vague and general, and for every rule there's an exception. Probably the most memorable advice is "live in the future and build what's missing", which I think is true, but hard to implement if you're not the right person.

Whereas the hacking tactics are more specific and actionable (although more likely to be out of date).

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#244

Post by chadcmulligan » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:18 PM UTC

buboard wrote: post #124

chadcmulligan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real world It's not the real world - its the human world. The real world is very different, and getting more so imho. Skills to survive the human world are usually useless in the real physical world. It's a distinction I read recently from a philosopher that I lost track of, maybe someone here knows. Her point was (I think) that when someone says the real world, with relation to education, it's not really - it'…

> and they can be changed is that a hard fact or wishful thinking? In the context of this discussion, the rewards do not come from "the physical world" but from other humans (money) , so generic mountain-survival skills are irrelevant

Of course they can be changed - how hard they are to change is another matter. The current system isn't set in stone, or handed down from above.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#245

Post by iamwil » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:20 PM UTC

hooande wrote: post #106

I know that learning how to hack systems is valuable because that's how I got into YCombinator. I set out specifically to hack the application process and succeeded. It wasn't even that difficult to do. If pg believes what he's saying in this essay, I have two questions: 1. why did he design a testing system that was easily hacked? 2. why does YCombinator itself focus so much on hacking the venture capital system, as…

It's because he doesn't believe getting into YC is the achievement. Creating a company with users / profitability / growth is. You can get into YC and still fail with your company. And it's desirable for founders and YC to be more interested in building a successful company.

When he says, "Make a good product", I think he's trying to convey a core and fundamental principle of business that gets obfuscated by all the things you have to do be successful in a startup. That's necessary when teaching beginners.

But he's traditionally had a hard time conveying this seemingly simple concept, and he's always been puzzled by it. You can see it in the previous essays he referenced in this one--the high school one, and how founders over-complicate things.

Though he's talking about this topic as if creating the company is the goal, I'm not sure to what degree he realizes how YC contributes to the effect he's seeing.

Even after getting into YC, I was moderately surprised by how you're still being judged, sometimes explicitly, and other time implicitly. I had batchmates that didn't want to go into office hours, for fear of appearing weak and hence wouldn't get a follow-on recommendation to investors from a YC partner.

Of course, I think PG would say that's stupid. If you go into office hours and fix your problem, then by virtue of being a better startup, you'll be a more attractive investment. Trying to do it the other way is putting the cart before the horse.

That said, the effect is real. Like the Observer Effect in quantum mechanics, by virtue of being a conduit to further funding, founders will turn their attention to the tests. Because if you don't, it's easy to be written off and not be able to get the help that you need.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#246

Post by DSingularity » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

jtanderson wrote: post #184

impendia wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't create a 200 person per year startup incubator that focuses on true learning instead of process hacking, then how could someone do it for a 20,000 person university? As a university professor, I can at least try . Not at scale -- certainly not for my entire university -- but for my own classes as an individual. There are several constraints, of course. I have to give grades, and students care about gra…

Agree wholeheartedly. That's exactly the approach I take, but the problem of course is that 1) it's difficult to do successfully, and 2) students "freak out" because the exams become unpredictable and they end up getting more stressed out that they need to about succeeding at the exam. Of course, my regular high-performing students do well regardless, but I haven't found a way to convince them that they have the skil…

The problem in my eyes is while you are fighting the fight your department is fighting another one entirely within a university of departments competing in yet another fight.

Who is fighting at the organizational level for the students?

The problem is systemic. All of the solutions I see, here and elsewhere, describe a small piece of the problem. At best — a few courses in a curriculum.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#247

Post by coffeemug » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

hooande wrote: post #106

I know that learning how to hack systems is valuable because that's how I got into YCombinator. I set out specifically to hack the application process and succeeded. It wasn't even that difficult to do. If pg believes what he's saying in this essay, I have two questions: 1. why did he design a testing system that was easily hacked? 2. why does YCombinator itself focus so much on hacking the venture capital system, as…

Companies are this way too. The best companies are all run by OKRs and metrics. But if you peek under the hood, all of it is insanely hackable; you have to be naive to try and actually meet your explicitly stated objectives because that's not how you get promoted.

It reminds me of a quote from The Elephant in the Brain. I don't remember the wording exactly, but it's something like "if there is a behavior in a large group of people that doesn't make sense to you, not only is it by design, but it's also probably the whole point."

Incidentally, I was also struck by how much of YC was (in 2009) about hacking venture capital. But lots of people from that era now say this behavior is unethical disavow all knowledge that it was ever actively promoted. It's like we lived through different realities.

If I were to steelman The Lesson to Unlearn I think I'd say this. On an individual level there is enormous benefit to learning how to operate without hacking a test. That's how you do great work; that's what original thinking is. On a societal level this seems unshakable. But societies have made dramatic shifts in behavior and social organization before. From hunter gatherers to farmers to city dwellers, for example. So while this is hard to imagine it might just be that-- lack of imagination. The social return to abandoning this system might indeed be enormous.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#248

Post by cm2012 » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:23 PM UTC

jakobegger wrote: post #231

adwn wrote: post #133

> The way you get lots of users is to make the product really great. That is wrong – or, at the very least, incomplete. "Build it and they will come" is the dream and misconception of every programmer who's talented at software development but not at sales. Hell, this is the number one advice of every business how-to book ever: You can't rely on people finding out about your great product by chance, you need to put i…

> "Build it and they will come" is the dream and misconception of every programmer (...) Well, the amount of marketing required strongly depends on the quality of and demand for your product. I built a software product and launched it with very very minimal marketing (I emailed a blogger and published it on a mailing list). People liked my app so much that I had a 1000 downloads within a few weeks (which I consider d…

No. I consult with B2B startups on marketing and have seen the internal data for 20+ B2B tech companies. If anything, the best products with the lowest churn have less referrals, since people don't want their competitors to have the competitive advantage the product provides.

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#249

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #145

adwn wrote: post #133

> The way you get lots of users is to make the product really great. That is wrong – or, at the very least, incomplete. "Build it and they will come" is the dream and misconception of every programmer who's talented at software development but not at sales. Hell, this is the number one advice of every business how-to book ever: You can't rely on people finding out about your great product by chance, you need to put i…

100% right, and the corollary of this is: you don't actually need to make a great product, if your sales&marketing game is good enough. Or, in other words, a lot of successful business - including startups - is exactly the "test hacking" PG urges founders to unlearn. I'm honestly surprised by this essay arguing that "hacking the test" is the wrong approach in startups/business. "Hacking the test" is essentially what…

[deleted]

Re: The Lesson to Unlearn

#250

Post by coffeemug » Sat, Dec 07, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

manmal wrote: post #20

My wife and I are contemplating unschooling our kids. The longer our son is in primary school, the more we see the deterioration of his willingness to learn anything school-related. He hates homework (as do most kids), and this is even more painful to see given that it has been shown that homework is essentially useless for learning performance. He still likes to write and do math, but as long as he is in school, we…

Don't know about Page and Brin, but according to the Netflix documentary Gates won state-level math Olympiad at a level three grades higher than his own. So he wasn't a modal child. You can't draw any conclusions from that about education at scale.