Y Combinator’s Paul Graham: We’re Looking For People Like Us • Hacker News Board

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

#101

Post by pg » Wed, May 25, 2011, 12:04 AM UTC

kemiller wrote: post #96

pg wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may find it helps clarify matters to read the article Charlie is referring to: http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html and also this: http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html Combined, the message is: focus on the high bits of good. If someone establishes a clinic in a poor country and saves people's lives, I'm not going to hold it against them if they do it with supplies that fell off a truck.

Thanks for the reply. I actually have read those. I admit, part of my reaction was purely personal. I want to found a company so much it hurts. I'm smart, resourceful, creative, and determined. But I wouldn't say I'm used to getting my way, and breaking rules -- even in service of a higher goal -- makes me very nervous. (Think Hermione Granger.) So reading this was like getting hit in the gut. Not that it will stop m…

If you're smart, resourceful, creative and determined (and you have a cofounder), you should be fine.

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

#102

Post by ajju » Wed, May 25, 2011, 12:15 AM UTC

kemiller wrote: post #96

pg wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may find it helps clarify matters to read the article Charlie is referring to: http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html and also this: http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html Combined, the message is: focus on the high bits of good. If someone establishes a clinic in a poor country and saves people's lives, I'm not going to hold it against them if they do it with supplies that fell off a truck.

Thanks for the reply. I actually have read those. I admit, part of my reaction was purely personal. I want to found a company so much it hurts. I'm smart, resourceful, creative, and determined. But I wouldn't say I'm used to getting my way, and breaking rules -- even in service of a higher goal -- makes me very nervous. (Think Hermione Granger.) So reading this was like getting hit in the gut. Not that it will stop m…

Google makes a cult of academic success in hiring but they are not immune to the general principle that it often takes naughty people to do revolutionary things in a largely rule driven system. If you look at the actual 'rainmakers' at Google, they all seem to be rule-breakers. Here are some actual things Googlers who changed the world did (all from "In the Plex"):

Andy Rubin (Android): "That's the way Google works, don't ask for permission for an idea, just go and do it. And then, when you are way beyond the point of no return, you're like, 'I need $200 million'"

Wesley Chan (Google Toolbar, Google Analytics): After Larry Page told him the Toolbar/Popup blocker was the "dumbest thing I've ever heard", Chan, a 'lowly' Associate Product Manager at the time, surreptitiously installed it on Page's computer and waited for him to mention how much faster his browser was running.

Paul Buchheit (Gmail, Later Friendfeed, Facebook, YC): IIRC he was the one who pushed for putting ads in Gmail based on the content of emails. When Google deployed this, it generated significant controversy and almost everyone considered it 'naughty' to say the least. Today, Gmail is the only place other than a search engine where I (and likely many others) click on any ads. The ads were important because providing Gigabytes of storage to millions of users for free is not scalable without generating revenue.

Google even tried to formalize naughtiness by making 20% projects, usually done as naughty skunkworks projects, part of the rules.

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

#103

Post by niqolas » Wed, May 25, 2011, 12:19 AM UTC

Consider the stats at the end of the article for a moment.

The total value of YC companies is $3 billion. While, the total amount invested by YC is $5 million.

Very impressive results when you consider that YC takes about a 6% stake for its initial investment. Congratulations to all involved.

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

#104

Post by rokhayakebe » Wed, May 25, 2011, 12:32 AM UTC

kemiller wrote: post #96

pg wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may find it helps clarify matters to read the article Charlie is referring to: http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html and also this: http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html Combined, the message is: focus on the high bits of good. If someone establishes a clinic in a poor country and saves people's lives, I'm not going to hold it against them if they do it with supplies that fell off a truck.

Thanks for the reply. I actually have read those. I admit, part of my reaction was purely personal. I want to found a company so much it hurts. I'm smart, resourceful, creative, and determined. But I wouldn't say I'm used to getting my way, and breaking rules -- even in service of a higher goal -- makes me very nervous. (Think Hermione Granger.) So reading this was like getting hit in the gut. Not that it will stop m…

I think you cannot create something of Great value without being naughty and breaking rules. You are just understanding it wrong. Someone at Google, Facebook, Twitter, Dropbox and other cos had to say "F the portals and the homepage filled with links", "F ads that aren't relevant to the user", "F proprietary software, we are going to make it open source", "F Myspace, I am going to make something clean and no user will be allowed to change the background", "F FTPing, emailing files, and copying files in my USB, I am going to make a box where you can just drop things", "F mile-long blog posts, we are going to limit it to 140 char. Want more? Though luck"... That's naughty, that's breaking the rules, and guess what? It's all good.

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

#105

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 25, 2011, 1:07 AM UTC

paul wrote: post #91

andrewcooke wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc, broke a few rules too. So I am not sure that championing rule breaking is going to help improve society. More likely, what's actually needed is a balance. And, interestingly, the kind of person that makes a good entrepreneur is probably on the psycopathic side of normal. A very nice article in the Guardian made this point at the weekend - http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/20…

Did you honestly understand my comment as implying that rule breaking automatically makes you a good person? (regardless of which rules are broken)

[deleted]

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

#106

Post by gbog » Wed, May 25, 2011, 1:37 AM UTC

amackera wrote: post #95

paul wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following all the rules does not make you a good person. In fact, rule following and obedience to authority is what enables large scale evil. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment for a famous demonstration.

Conversely, breaking all the rules almost always makes you a bad person.

The way I work this out is to consider that there are rules, and principles. Breaking some rules is ok, as long as principles are solid behind. Moral principles tell me I should not betray my friends or my family, for example. If the issue is whether or not I should game SEO, lie to my boss or scan competitor servers for vulnerabilities, it is more on the "rules" side.

If I break a rule, I still can stare at myself in the mirror, and I will even be able to tell this to my children when they will be grown-ups. If I happen to break one of my moral principles, it will be another story.

This is nothing new, Confucius taught this long time ago already.

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

#107

Post by KaeseEs » Wed, May 25, 2011, 2:37 AM UTC

jdp23 wrote: post #72

paul wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Following all the rules does not make you a good person. In fact, rule following and obedience to authority is what enables large scale evil. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment for a famous demonstration.

Great point. Although the YC universe has plenty of obedience-to-authority elements as well -- think of how many times people on HN invoke "the rules" to shut down discussions about the TSA.

The naughtiness stuff works on HN despite this, probably since you can't downvote articles and an article eventually getting flagged into deep space doesn't negate the upvotes it received beforehand. The system relies on humans not rewarding intensely but shallowly interesting articles, but perversely these remain a quick route to points.

Nb. I think that recent discussions have put a moderate damper on this, and perhaps the newer ranking algo (in which flagging has greater weight I think?) has played a part, but the problem remains.

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

#108

Post by jackpirate » Wed, May 25, 2011, 2:50 AM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #89

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're looking for decision theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_theory

What I'm interested in though isn't what makes a decision by a person ethical or rational or whatever, but rather what makes a social system itself (or an algorithm that interfaces with people) ethical or unethical. E.g. looking at the ethics of the design the social system behind the Zimbardo prison experiments, rather than looking at the decisions of the individual actors once they're already in that environment. I…

I've always thought that systems were inherently evil. By goerdel's theorem, you won't be able to exhaustive list enough rules to make the system perfect. Therefore, we always must rely on individuals making human moral judgements. (This is a way simplified personal philosophy that I've never seen anyone articulate well. Maybe I'll have to write a treatise on of someday.)

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

#109

Post by nl » Wed, May 25, 2011, 3:40 AM UTC

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 ....

Except that they didn't lie.

English isn't a computer program - there are many interpretations possible. I suspect that they didn't even see the other interpretation of their language around security until someone pointed it out to them.

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

#110

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 25, 2011, 4:56 AM UTC

pg wrote: post #77

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.

You may find it helps clarify matters to read the article Charlie is referring to: http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html and also this: http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html Combined, the message is: focus on the high bits of good. If someone establishes a clinic in a poor country and saves people's lives, I'm not going to hold it against them if they do it with supplies that fell off a truck.

[deleted]