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

Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#41

Post by Alex3917 »

kemiller wrote: post #14

This is probably the single most discouraging thing I've ever read about startups, but at least it's honest. Entitlement? "Naughtiness"? I think after Google, the idea got out there that it's possible to succeed by just being good . Technically and morally. This sounds like a return to status quo. Not saying he's wrong. He's almost certainly right, it's just depressing.

"There are some people who just get what they want in the world. If you want to start a startup you have to be one of those people."

Think of it this way. As children we all needed to compete for the attention and resources of our parents, otherwise we would have starved. So typically the oldest child uses the strategy of being charismatic, in order to manipulate the parents into paying attention to it. The the second child comes along, but by this point there is no way it's ever going to out compete the oldest child on the axis of charisma, because the oldest child just has too much of a head start. So the second child often acts kind of sickly and pathetic, again as a different strategy for manipulating the parents into providing attention and resources.

The point is that in order to succeed in a startup, you need to be well versed in a variety of these strategies in order to get other people to help you. Otherwise you're not going to get any of the resources you need, because you're way too small and pathetic to be worth caring about based on any intrinsic measure of worth.

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#42

Post by geebee »

tlb wrote: post #16
kemiller wrote: post #14

This is probably the single most discouraging thing I've ever read about startups, but at least it's honest. Entitlement? "Naughtiness"? I think after Google, the idea got out there that it's possible to succeed by just being good . Technically and morally. This sounds like a return to status quo. Not saying he's wrong. He's almost certainly right, it's just depressing.

The Google founders were more than simply good. They were determined to be #1. Most people aren't.

They are now, but were they at the start? I remember a PG essay where the google guys were held up as an example of how even those developers with amazing potential can still be hesitant at the beginning, unsure of whether they want to or even can run a company.

I think this is the quote I remember...:

from http://paulgraham.com/notnot.html

"There's nothing wrong with being unsure. If you're a hacker thinking about starting a startup and hesitating before taking the leap, you're part of a grand tradition. Larry and Sergey seem to have felt the same before they started Google, and so did Jerry and Filo before they started Yahoo. In fact, I'd guess the most successful startups are the ones started by uncertain hackers rather than gung-ho business guys."

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#43

Post by btilly »

jdp23 wrote: post #37
freshfunk wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a morally-flexible environment, it's easy to confuse the two. For example - Zynga selling offers (for credits) with very fine print that signs you up for paid services. And the fine print is so convoluted/tiny most people don't read it. Helping or hurting consumers? - Facebook hiring a PR firm to highlight questionable privacy practices by Google. Helping users or hurting Google? - Subprime mortgages. Helping or h…

Dropbox lying about their security guarantees ....

The fact that they are a Y-combinator company makes this far and away the best example given.

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#44

Post by btilly »

lurker19 wrote: post #15
kylemathews wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, double that 5 million then to 10 million (a very generous assessment of their time). It's still an incredible return.

5ish years for 5ish people, some of whom could draw quite a fine salary in the M&A division of a big company or hedge fund or VC firm, and $5M doesn't seem too very generous an estimate. It is close to dead-on.

All of whom have relevant knowledge and experience which tends to only be acquired by making enough money that they don't have to work again. Care to revise your estimate of the money it would take to hire them upwards?

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#45

Post by freshfunk »

smokeyj wrote: post #38
freshfunk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the positive qualities of being Kirk-esque and creating one's own rules (see Kobayashi Maru). I also understand the qualities of being single-minded in purpose, determination and the will to succeed. These are qualities needed to survive in the uncertain, risky and scary environment of an entrepreneur. However, I wonder when we begin to cross the fine-line between naughtiness, white-lies, small-rule brea…

I feel 'naughtiness' represents disregard for the status quo, rather than a commitment to immorality. The obedient drone regards law-breaking as immoral, whereas the independent thinker would ask why the law exists.

The thing is that both the status quo and immorality often come down to judgment calls.

Is it immoral to gather personal data and then share it on the internet? (Facebook personal profiles going public.)

Is it immoral to pay a PR firm to portray a competitor in a negative light if it means highlighting their questionable practices? (Facebook hiring a PR firm to highlight Google Social.)

Is it immoral to characterize a service you offer one way while leaving important details to fine print or convoluted text? (Zynga's lead gen offers, DropBox security.)

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#46

Post by mrduncan »

patio11 wrote: post #28
kemiller wrote: post #14

This is probably the single most discouraging thing I've ever read about startups, but at least it's honest. Entitlement? "Naughtiness"? I think after Google, the idea got out there that it's possible to succeed by just being good . Technically and morally. This sounds like a return to status quo. Not saying he's wrong. He's almost certainly right, it's just depressing.

Google is at least a little naughty. Remember, at the dawn of the Internet, there was quite a bit of ambiguity with regards to IP rights. Many newspapers sent out Cease and Desists just for deep-linking to their articles. There was still quite a bit of presumption about how much control of use copyright gave you. Google walks into this minefield and says "You know, we're going to crawl and cache everything , then exp…

Also, don't forget about Google Books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Book_Search_Settlement_A...

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#47

Post by klochner »

kemiller wrote: post #14

This is probably the single most discouraging thing I've ever read about startups, but at least it's honest. Entitlement? "Naughtiness"? I think after Google, the idea got out there that it's possible to succeed by just being good . Technically and morally. This sounds like a return to status quo. Not saying he's wrong. He's almost certainly right, it's just depressing.

Those words don't have quite the right connotations, try the following edits:

   naughty  --> mischievous 
   entitled --> relentless and determined

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#48

Post by justin »

citizenkeys wrote: post #32

Meh... Y Combinator is a potential source of start-up funding. Just as important, Y Combinator is not exclusive of any other source of funding. The difference between YC and other sources of funding is that YC funds a lot of companies twice a year rather than on an as-needed basis so the whole process is very eventful. As YC funds more companies, the value of the "We're a YC company" branding diminishes faster. Whats…

Most YC companies sell their initial product to other YC companies (whether it is consumer or enterprise) because that is what everyone does when they start out: sell to people in their personal social circles -- that's who you have access to as a nobody with no sales force that is just initially developing a product. This is hardly a conspiracy; as with all products sold to friends and family, the initial customer set will give the product a shot, but won't continue to use it long just because a friend sold it to them. YC companies that are successful break out of this initial customer base and sell to people outside the YC network. This is a must for any company that wants to grow past its founders.

The YC brand has improved over time drastically despite the increase in companies. When I started in the first YC batch, there were only 8 companies but the only angels that could bother to show up to demo day were just some of PG's friends. Now, demo day is a who's who of SV investors, even though they have to sit through 5x as many presentations!

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#49

Post by pjscott »

rubashov wrote: post #35
metra wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Birkenstocks with socks is okay: http://www.gq.com/style/style-guy/shoes/200309/birkenstocks

Birkenstocks are never OK.

And fashion snobbery is?

Birkenstocks are a kind of footwear. Lots of people like them. What's the point of getting affronted by this? Does it make the world anything other than worse?

Re: Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us

#50

Post by btilly »

blacksmythe wrote: post #31
lurker19 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good point, but to your original point: "invest in me just because I impressed PG (plus more good reasons that may be true but the investor cannot see)" does not fall into your category of "unbreaking things" like the rest, especially at the start of YC. By now YC has certainly built institutional credibility, but even that can be broken if one day PG turns evil and sells out the brand like Pyrex or show or…

>> turns evil and sells out the brand Doesn't seem like in his best interest. His present model has been incredibly successful, and what he is selling is a pre-screened class. I imagine that his applicant pool is becoming more and more qualified over time, giving him a graduating 'class' that is constantly improving.

His interest is actually the same as for any kind of certification, and that is to increase the number of people getting certified for as long as the certification is seen as having value.

Thus it is a little scary that every Y-combinator class is bigger than the previous one.

However he is also figuring out how to scale the model and provide more assistance. For example current graduates benefit from finer tuned screening, have more kinds of assistance available, better assistance (pg knows more than he did when he started), a bigger network to draw on, and save more otherwise wasted fundraising time.

On balance the result is that classes seem to be getting better, not worse.

However I guarantee that a point will be reached where the Y-combinator model can't keep improving and growing at the same time. At that point his personal financial interest will still be to keep growing the program. It will be interesting to see what happens then.

Post reply on HN