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

The End of the Beginning

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: The End of the Beginning

#71

Post by tim333 »

christiansakai wrote: post #13

I've been thinking along the same line, albeit on a more personal take as a software engineer. Basically, starting around 15 years ago, there's the proliferation of bootcamps teaching fullstack development, because software startups were the new hot thing, and they desperately need generalist engineers that were capable of spinning up web app quickly. Rails was the hot thing those days because of this as well. Hence…

The low hanging CRUD apps may have been done but there are still less low hanging CRUD apps like Flexport (rails) and the advance of AI is opening up loads of new opportunities.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#72

Post by chrisco255 »

zozbot234 wrote: post #54
christiansakai wrote: post #13

I've been thinking along the same line, albeit on a more personal take as a software engineer. Basically, starting around 15 years ago, there's the proliferation of bootcamps teaching fullstack development, because software startups were the new hot thing, and they desperately need generalist engineers that were capable of spinning up web app quickly. Rails was the hot thing those days because of this as well. Hence…

Software is still eating the world, and there will be plenty to eat for a long time. Cars (the foremost example in the OP) had basically eaten the world by the 1950s (sometimes even in a fairly literal sense).

Interesting to note, that software is in the process of eating the automobile industry.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#73

Post by christiansakai »

alexashka wrote: post #69
christiansakai wrote: post #13

I've been thinking along the same line, albeit on a more personal take as a software engineer. Basically, starting around 15 years ago, there's the proliferation of bootcamps teaching fullstack development, because software startups were the new hot thing, and they desperately need generalist engineers that were capable of spinning up web app quickly. Rails was the hot thing those days because of this as well. Hence…

The tragedy of people who want to make money and believe it will be 'life changing', is that no matter how many times they are told it won't be, they think 'ha, you only say that because you got yours'. What useless shit are you going to buy with 'life changing' money exactly that a software developer's salary won't allow?

I live moderately. I don't wear jewelries, watches. All my clothes are from Uniqlo. I don't have expensive toys. I have mediocre gaming PC, my old Macbook pro laptop, an iPhone X, and a small set of electric guitar + few pedals + small amp. I have a small 29 gal aquarium. I live in a cheap area in NYC (Queens, nearby Flushing). I have monthly karate membership, and give regularly to my local church.

But I started my career late. I had three different unrelated degrees (no student debt thankfully, I attended public schools), jumping to different fields in my career. I also need to be ready to support my all-single/divorced-female old family members (aunt, mom, grandma). I also will probably have kids in two years.

So a FAANG salary would be nice.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#74

Post by hogFeast »

oflannabhra wrote: post #15

I'm not exactly sure where I fall on this. Ben is a really smart guy (way smarter than me), but I feel like this could be a classic case of hindsight. Now, looking back, it makes sense that the next logical step after PCs was the Internet. But from each era looking forward, it's not as easy to see the next "horizon". So, if each next "horizon" is hard to see, and the paradigm it subsequently unlocks is also difficult…

This has happened in every industry and in every time period. The mistake made in the article is that the author doesn't actually appear to realise how important this effect is (it is always amazing to me that you have all these people writing about the same topics, always from the same angle...no-one thinks to just open a book, and check what happened last time...actually I am aware of one book that has done this, just one). Again: every industry, every time period. It is permanent.

Definitely, you see new industries replacing old ones. Acknowledging the above isn't denying progress. But every industry consolidates down to a few large companies.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#75

Post by hogFeast »

legitster wrote: post #28

I've been reading Zero to One, and one of the ideas the book pitches is that monopoly and innovation are two sides of the same coin. Only monopoly-like companies have time and money to dump into innovative products (Bell, GE, IBM, Google). And people only invest in an idea if they think they can profit from it (look at how crucial a patent system was for the industrial revolution). Competition is important, but to dr…

That isn't right.

The truth is somewhere in the middle: definitely, you see some large companies invest heavily but (more commonly) you see small firms nibble at the edges of an existing product until it is too late for the larger companies.

Saying that monopoly produces innovation is like saying government produces innovation. It happens but given a long enough period all things happen. The question is about incentives: the incentives to innovate within large companies are terrible, that is why it doesn't happen most of the time.

Also, consolidation has happened in all industries at all times. It is a function of things that repeat: knowledge curves, lindy effects, etc.

Just generally: be wary of Thiel and his ilk. They have a predilection for ahistorical nonsense. The history in this area, broadly business history, is particularly difficult and not well known (the only tech person who I have seen get close is Patrick Collison..and then...not really).

Re: The End of the Beginning

#76

Post by chrisco255 »

pthomas551 wrote: post #32
oflannabhra wrote: post #15

I'm not exactly sure where I fall on this. Ben is a really smart guy (way smarter than me), but I feel like this could be a classic case of hindsight. Now, looking back, it makes sense that the next logical step after PCs was the Internet. But from each era looking forward, it's not as easy to see the next "horizon". So, if each next "horizon" is hard to see, and the paradigm it subsequently unlocks is also difficult…

Was it really that hard to predict the Internet? SF authors picked up on it almost immediately.

I mean, if you even look at popular sci-fi, nobody exactly predicted the internet as it is today. It wasn't until someone coined the "information superhighway" that gears started turning. Even then, the earliest commercial websites were basically just digital brochures and catalogs. It wasn't until SaaS, search and social took off that we grasped what the specific use cases were that were going to be the dominant money makers. And the internet evolved quite a bit as a result.

Some people like me still lament the loss of the 90s internet in some ways, as it felt like a more "wild west" domain and not saturated and stale like it is today.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#77

Post by chrisco255 »

gfodor wrote: post #24
the_af wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree Kurzweil's hypothesis is well known... within techie/Silicon Valley circles, somewhat like the Singularity -- a related concept -- is common in those circles as well. Regardless, there's no particular weight to Kurzweil's hypothesis, tantalizing as it may seem, and it's not reasonable in my opinion to use it as a measuring stick of other hypotheses as if Kurzweil was a proven and acknowledged authority on thi…

I think his hypothesis deserves more credit than that — many of his predictions have come to pass, and many of those that have, at the time they were predicted, seemed somewhat far fetched since they were firmly in the realm of science fiction.

It doesn't matter. Each prediction has to be weighed on its own merit against ever-evolving reality. Even Einstein didn't bat a thousand.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#78

Post by andreilys »

JohnFen wrote: post #61
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that startups never paid well. Sure, if you got lucky and were employee #7 at Facebook, it paid off great! But even during that time frame, working at startups instead of MS or Google was not a good proposition. And even during DotCom and the rise of Microsoft, it paid a lot better to work at IBM than these classes of startups.

True. I prefer working for startups and tiny companies -- not because of the income potential (as you point out, there are better ways of chasing that), but because the really interesting stuff is almost always done by startups and tiny companies. Small companies make it possible, large companies make it economical.

Not always true. There are some very interesting projects at Google, Apple, etc. that can only be done by companies capable of throwing hundreds of Millions/billions of dollars at problems with uncertain payoffs

Re: The End of the Beginning

#79

Post by andreilys »

alexashka wrote: post #69
christiansakai wrote: post #13

I've been thinking along the same line, albeit on a more personal take as a software engineer. Basically, starting around 15 years ago, there's the proliferation of bootcamps teaching fullstack development, because software startups were the new hot thing, and they desperately need generalist engineers that were capable of spinning up web app quickly. Rails was the hot thing those days because of this as well. Hence…

The tragedy of people who want to make money and believe it will be 'life changing', is that no matter how many times they are told it won't be, they think 'ha, you only say that because you got yours'. What useless shit are you going to buy with 'life changing' money exactly that a software developer's salary won't allow?

The inverse of that is being poor, where one unlucky break can lead you to living on the streets.

As with most things in life, the best path is the middle path.

Re: The End of the Beginning

#80

Post by nl »

while new I/O devices like augmented reality, wearables, or voice are natural extensions of the phone.

I don't agree with this at all. This is like saying "the internet is a natural extensions of the operating system, therefore Microsoft Windows will remain all powerful and the sole route to consumers"

Bill Gates in his famous memo realised that this wasn't the case, and Google realized that mobile did to the internet what the internet did to Windows (hence Android).

Wearables are radically different to phones. People want to use them differently, and interact with them in different way to how they do with phones.

To be clear: We are in the very early days of wearables, and Apple is far and away the dominant player (and maybe Garmin). But there is huge disruptive potential here.

Post reply on HN