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

It’s Time to Build

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: It’s Time to Build

#351

Post by [deleted] »

imgabe wrote: post #337
soared wrote: post #228

Ah yes, the lack of success in our nation is purely the individual’s fault. Your fault, my fault. There are no structural issues, misallocations of capitals, disincentives. You should be working harder on bigger problems! Quit your job at Walmart, and start working on things that matter. What the fuck Andreessen? Are you so out of touch with reality that you think if the working class just worked a little harder, a l…

> There are no structural issues, misallocations of capitals, disincentives. Who created the structure? Who allocates capital? Who creates incentives? These are not natural phenomena that arise without human intervention. Someone made the decisions that created them and someone has the power to make different decisions. Yes, even decisions that you personally make might contribute in some way. Instead of throwing up…

[deleted]

Re: It’s Time to Build

#352

Post by galimaufry »

amasad wrote: post #321
worik wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a problem. Ten years is not long term. In the long term we are all dead. So we have to want to do these things for people who are not born yet and who will never pay us or pay us back or be able to even thank us. We have to do these things because these things are the right thing to do. That will decrease our wealth. Now please explain how capitalism can do that?

Having children will give you that incentive. People with no children will have higher time preference -- they prefer today's consumption over investment in the future. That's why I find a lot of the antinatalism of modern western culture to be concerning.

Are parents' incentives really that strong? We need all sorts of laws to prevent parents from exploiting or maltreating their children. It seems that parental instincts are not very reliable.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#353

Post by MattGaiser »

stale2002 wrote: post #301
MattGaiser wrote: post #8

You are a billionare Marc. You are probably one of the top 1000 people with the capacity to build in North America. So, how many of the things you list are you building?

This is what I will call the redirection or hypocrisy fallacy. Regardless if you think that Marc is fulfilling the values that he claims to support, point this out does nothing to dismiss the actual point that he made. So his point is still valid. And misdirecting the conversation to being about Marc, is not a valid way of disagreeing with the point being made.

"Every step of the way, to everyone around us, we should be asking the question, what are you building?"

I am doing what he asked at the bottom of the essay. :)

On a more serious note, I don't disagree with the essay. I don't view his point as wrong. It just applies a lot more relevantly to him than most other people who might read it.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#354

Post by TheDong »

kick wrote: post #159
cactus2093 wrote: post #78

Ok, assume I'm bought into this idea - where would I even begin? What are some companies working on these kind of fundamental building things problems? I know of the Boring Company, though haven't really heard anything from them since the flamethrowers a few years back. Sidewalk labs was doing some cool things in Toronto, but I think they've been running into big regulatory issues too and it one point it sounded like…

If you're actually set on the ideas laid out there, don't join a pre-existing company . Find a domain you're passionate about advancing, learn what you need to validate your hypothesis on improvement, then do what you need to do to advance it. If you don't have any passion about whatever you'd be doing, there's not really any point; the world doesn't advance because of people who don't care about what they're doing.…

The parent comment is asking for tractable ways for a person to help improve things. Starting a company is not tractable for almost anyone. If you have kids, are poor, etc, you need some form of income. If you don't fit the right mold, you're unlikely to get VCs to invest in you.

Starting a company is not a feasible option for most people, and the average company fails and ends up causing nothing but harm for all involved (in the form of lost years of their life they could be doing something that didn't fail so).

Your answer amounts to "you can't do anything. It's impossible unless you're so privileged or already independently wealthy that you can start a company".

Your answer sounds like "Well, Bill Gates made the Bill Gates foundation, just make your own research institution".

Re: It’s Time to Build

#355

Post by dang »

soared wrote: post #228

Ah yes, the lack of success in our nation is purely the individual’s fault. Your fault, my fault. There are no structural issues, misallocations of capitals, disincentives. You should be working harder on bigger problems! Quit your job at Walmart, and start working on things that matter. What the fuck Andreessen? Are you so out of touch with reality that you think if the working class just worked a little harder, a l…

That's obviously not what he's saying. Would you please review the HN guidelines? They include: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: It’s Time to Build

#356

Post by geofft »

KirinDave wrote: post #293
hdbdidusn wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t mind me asking, what radio group are you involved with? I’m been working on some tangentially related projects and would love to be involved. Apologies for the new HN account, lost my password for my main one somehow.

Please see sfwem.org. It is not my project but I've pushed it heavily and recruited for it.

I think the URL is https://www.sfwem.net/ .

(Also, cool stuff!)

Re: It’s Time to Build

#357

Post by csallen »

CyanLite4 wrote: post #322
BurningFrog wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can we change incentives for lawmakers?

Congress has a 20% approval rating, polled weekly for over the past decade. Yet we vote every two years for the same folks who give us the same results. The problem isn’t them. It’s us.

I was going to say the same. Lawmakers are elected officials. They're incentivized to do what gets them votes. And voters are concerned with the complexity of laws. Perhaps what we need is better education to create more informed voters. But if lawmakers are in charge of that, too, I'm not super hopeful.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#358

Post by MattGaiser »

harryh wrote: post #294
KirinDave wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been through the VC wringer I don't think you can be unprofitable for a decade.

Uber, Dropbox, AirBnB, Slack, Pinterest. Long term un-profitable venture backed software companies are practically a cliche at this point.

They are not long term unprofitable for the VCs. Those companies have been through rounds and rounds of growth which has brought in other investors (i.e. who VCs can sell to if they desire).

What about the company that would need to labour for 5 years before they get the MVP out the door?

Re: It’s Time to Build

#359

Post by pascalxus »

He's right about a lot of things.

But, as far as education goes, if everyone got a degree, then what's the point? it would have no value at all. The whole point of awarding degrees is to separate those who have them from those that don't. How are employers supposed to know who to higher, if everyone has a degree?

Re: It’s Time to Build

#360

Post by darawk »

fcarraldo wrote: post #332
darawk wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Markets build in response to incentives. Most American production choices are determined by markets, including the choices of investors allocating capital. This leaves out the most important problem though: regulatory capture and bureaucratic gridlock. Markets would love to build more housing. But they're prevented from doing so by the regulatory state. Markets would love to build nuclear power plants, but they're…

> Markets would love to build more housing. But they're prevented from doing so by the regulatory state. I'm not certain this is a problem outside of the Bay area.

It's a problem in most major urban centers. I live in Los Angeles, and it's certainly a problem here.
Post reply on HN