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

I Don't Want to Be a Founder

carolchen.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 245 posts

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#81

Post by mkl »

topkai22 wrote: post #51
jarsbe wrote: post #14

Why is it that starting a tech start up is seen as an uber difficult task often resulting in burnout while starting a business in a technical occupation such as electrical or refrigeration is (seemingly) less risque? Surely there are a plenty of opportunities where rather boring software can be applied to business problems. Does it always need to be a monumental technical accomplishment to create a success?

The author has agreed elsewhere in this thread that he’s basically writing about taking VC money. That being said, the advice applies elsewhere. My dad was a physician in US military and then decided to open up a private practice. He spent decades running a business where he was the sole source of revenue, and as far as I can tell hated dealing with any aspect of it that wasn’t direct patient care. He eventually join…

*she

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#82

Post by thecleaner »

fermienrico wrote: post #34
kipply wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am this close to changing it, this is very good

I like how according to Silicon Valley, a "Founder" is a person that has borrowed capital from VCs. I live in Silicon Valley and there are more businesses here that are not backed by VCs than otherwise. Tens of thousands of small businesses who work as hard as the top dogs sucking up to VCs, yet they're just businesses with owners, not "Startups" with "Founders". Some people still call Dropbox, Airbnb and Uber as "St…

A "Founder" is someone who creates their own company with or without VC money. If VC money was a pre requisite then Jeff Bezos wont be a founder.

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#83

Post by tonyedgecombe »

imprettycool wrote: post #37
jaxn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The downsides are still there it takes the same level of commitment, dedication, and obsessive effort to bootstrap. It has taken me 5 years to bootstrap a niche b2b saas to $1m ARR. It is both awesome and terrible.

It doesn't have to be stressful or full-commitment. I'm cool with $50k ARR.

I'm not even sure revenue is that good of a signal of the work put in. Didn't the Basecamp guys start off on just 10 hours a week inbetween their day job.

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#84

Post by tonyedgecombe »

jarsbe wrote: post #14

Why is it that starting a tech start up is seen as an uber difficult task often resulting in burnout while starting a business in a technical occupation such as electrical or refrigeration is (seemingly) less risque? Surely there are a plenty of opportunities where rather boring software can be applied to business problems. Does it always need to be a monumental technical accomplishment to create a success?

Being a contractor or freelancer has more in common with those sort of businesses.

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#85

Post by bjornsing »

I’m a former VC-backed founder and I liked the post, but this part made me cringe:

> To be ambitious often means things like wanting to do a Ph.D, become a medical doctor or an astronaut.

Why should it be considered ambitious to do a PhD or become a medical doctor. Those are just slogs that most people can get through if they stick it out... Something is very wrong with our cultural preconceptions around ambition. It’s like real ambition is now so taboo we can’t even talk about it or something... Can anybody explain it to me like I’m 5yo?

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#86

Post by switch11 »

Could someone please explain to me what the value in this article is?

It's written by a 18 year old who has never started a company

So, as someone who has started multiple companies and currently running a profitable albeit small startup, what insights should I get from this article?

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#87

Post by spurdoman77 »

switch11 wrote: post #86

Could someone please explain to me what the value in this article is? It's written by a 18 year old who has never started a company So, as someone who has started multiple companies and currently running a profitable albeit small startup, what insights should I get from this article?

Can someone explain to me, what the value of metacomments like this are?

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#88

Post by jackpirate »

bjornsing wrote: post #85

I’m a former VC-backed founder and I liked the post, but this part made me cringe: > To be ambitious often means things like wanting to do a Ph.D, become a medical doctor or an astronaut. Why should it be considered ambitious to do a PhD or become a medical doctor. Those are just slogs that most people can get through if they stick it out... Something is very wrong with our cultural preconceptions around ambition. It…

Those are just slogs that most people can get through if they stick it out...

Most adults in the US do not even have a college degree. For their children, aspiring to be a doctor would be incredibly ambitious and an amazing accomplishment.

Acknowledging that these high-prestige professions are very difficult for certain members of society to get into does not make talking about your ambitions "taboo", and I frankly find your comment incredibly out of touch with the average person.

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#89

Post by s1t5 »

switch11 wrote: post #86

Could someone please explain to me what the value in this article is? It's written by a 18 year old who has never started a company So, as someone who has started multiple companies and currently running a profitable albeit small startup, what insights should I get from this article?

Don't assume that something is completely useless just because it isn't targeted directly at you or because you have more experience or knowledge than the author.

Re: I Don't Want to Be a Founder

#90

Post by langitbiru »

gkoberger wrote: post #71
Mave83 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You'll spend more time writing emails than writing code. You end up bogged down in organizational issues, not dreaming up cool new features. Rather than having one boss, you now have dozens... investors, customers, employees, etc." why not hire a COO that takes care of it? Don't do jobs that you are not happy with for long. For some short time that is acceptable, but not for long. I don't count my customers as by bo…

Maybe "boss" wasn't the right word – I should have said "Rather than having one boss, you now have dozens of people you're accountable to... investors, customers, employees, etc." And sure, hiring can make issues go away (I've definitely done it!), but I think you're missing my point – no matter who you hire below you, if you're the CEO, the buck still stops with you. You're the one ultimately responsible.

"if you're the CEO, the buck still stops with you." -> Being a founder does not mean being a CEO. You can become CTO, CPO, CMO, or other as a founder.

Of course, CEO is much more prestigious than the other C-level roles. But like you said, it has its own price.

Post reply on HN