Live data from Hacker News

Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

lederhosenlabs.com

41–50 of 78 posts

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#41

Most technical mistakes that a non-technical founder can make will involve one of two things: Scalability, and maintainability Lacking knowledge in these two things will not hinder an early startup website much, so it's easy to go ahead and build something without expertise in these domains. The only thing that sucks about these situations is that once your company takes off, the engineers you hire will be left to ma…

Or rebuild it in the background with a second 'team'. I know that people warn about rebuilding your product in the early stage. But in such a case, why not start from scratch one more time? Seems reasonable, if there is a user demand already and the first version didn't take very long.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#42

Despite the title, this guy does seem to assume he needs an experienced technologist as a cofounder. Can someone explain what the value a really experienced technologist adds is? (Additionally, can that value be provided by a first employee rather than a cofounder?) (Context: I'm a journeyman-level technologist, trying to figure out where the point of diminishing returns for becoming a better one is.)

It's possible to build a very slick-looking prototype that uses Microsoft Access as its datastore. While the Access UI is arguably easier for a businessperson to mock up databases with, it's unlikely to survive beyond a handful of simultaneous users.

A competent tech founder will inherently understand issues of scalability, security, data structures, and so on. By applying this knowledge, you can iterate faster and not have to stop for a costly rewrite because the site was crushed by moderate traffic, leaks private data, was hacked, etc.

Given that you're going to want to get the technology right before you launch, it's generally the role of a founder to tackle these issues. The title "founder" implies a certain level of equity participation beyond that of an employee, but it's all arbitrary anyways.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#43
After a few months I had a prototype and it actually worked. The application screen-scraped data, stored it in a database, presented it to the user, and then submitted data to an external system.

Much better decision than hiring someone that could do it in a day.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#44

Despite the title, this guy does seem to assume he needs an experienced technologist as a cofounder. Can someone explain what the value a really experienced technologist adds is? (Additionally, can that value be provided by a first employee rather than a cofounder?) (Context: I'm a journeyman-level technologist, trying to figure out where the point of diminishing returns for becoming a better one is.)

> Can someone explain what the value a really experienced technologist adds is? (Additionally, can that value be provided by a first employee rather than a cofounder?)

I'll take a shot at this.

There is a large gap between "good enough to get the job done" and "stable, maintainable, and secure." It's important to get the kind of technical person who has a solid grasp of the proper way to develop software. A cofounder will care a lot more about building a lasting, maintainable business than random programmers will. Someone has to take pride in the codebase and take responsibility for auditing others' work as well, and it's hard for me to see a non-cofounder really caring enough.

A technical cofounder will be much more invested in the enterprise when things get tough, and in a startup they will! Something will break, someone will attack the site, traffic will peak unexpectedly, and as a founder you will want to know that you have someone who is capable and willing to handle those issues when they come up. A contracted programmer certainly will not fix issues like that cheaply, and even an employee is likely to seek other options after a few such incidents.

If you want to build a thriving, lasting company while minimizing difficulties, there is no substitute for a good technical cofounder.

Edit: While writing my comment, biot explained my first point in a more concrete way.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#45

After a few months I had a prototype and it actually worked. The application screen-scraped data, stored it in a database, presented it to the user, and then submitted data to an external system. Much better decision than hiring someone that could do it in a day.

Not sure if you are being sarcastic, so I am taking it as you were serious.

There are arguments both for and against taking a few months to do it yourself when someone could have done it in day.

He invested his few months and now he has the credibility and experience to implement the prototype himself, talk to technical founders, manage contractors and see through bullshit.

On the other hand, if this was all his prototype was, he could have paid someone hourly rate to build it and then launched early and improvised. He could still have learned on his own time - he would have saved a lot of it by trading it for some money.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#46
post #31
post #2

Good post, but I would change the title. It's not about technical co-founders being overrated. It's about how it's a good idea to make yourself technical enough if you are a business person who wants to start a company based on a web application.

Diego - I admit the title was a bit inflammatory. The theme, as you note, is that business people don't need a technical person to get proof of life. Also, don't treat technical people like shite. -Will

Eh, more than a bit. The epithet you chose echo the exact words I hear from many white collar execs trying to turn "social networking for baby boomers" into some sort of cash cow, believing that licensing a 200k per year social networking software and getting millions in capital is The Right Way.

I understand your article wasn't actually about that and it was more about the self-empowerment you found through doing it yourself. I'm in full support of self-empowerment - but I will say this: technical cofounders are strictly not overrated. As has been suggested many times in this comment thread, a balance between a good business cofounder and a good technical cofounder is a great way to do it.

A one-man technical founder can get along without a business person or even outsourcing to a business consultant; a one-man business founder cannot get along without a technical person or without outsourcing to a technical contractor/consultant. Additionally, I applaud your self-driven effort, but it is a common mistake to think you can take over the world after 6 months to even 4 years of self-taught programming experience.

As a business person, you did well by learning just enough to build a prototype, from there, you should be able to attract a technical cofounder that has the skill and talent you are ultimately going to need in the long run and probably don't have the time or desire to pick up on your own.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#47
Great post. I want to call attention to Will's first comment from Josh Strike, who articulated what I'm thinking pretty well.

(Doesn't seem like I can link to it, so I'm pasting - and truncating, so I encourage you to read his full comment):

Most coders are autodidacts. The ones without a DIY ethos drop out pretty quickly. Frankly, the reason the tech side feels free to give the business side a lot of crap -- other than the fact that you guys make more than we do, in mysterious ways unimaginable to us -- is that the business heads tend to lack that DIY drive to figure it out for themselves. Basically, wasting our time with things they could google, or learn to do, if they were as diligent as we are being (and we, being paid less to do more, feel a right to gripe). But you don't sound like that; actually, you sound like you took the hacker mentality and applied it to business, which is what we'd all like to do. SO, bravo. The fact that you did that is great. Don't rest on your laurels (or your co-founder); keep improving yourself.

[...]

The most important thing to remember if you're going to delegate -- whether it's hammering nails, making pizza dough or writing code -- is that the guy with his hands in the pie has the power to demolish you if you don't understand what he's doing. And lives by the sweat of his balls. So buy him a beer...and never consider anything to be magic. If you do, you've just put yourself in the dangerous position of not being able to fix it when it breaks down.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#48
post #27
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Being a successful entrepreneur means doing anything and everything it takes to get to success." I think the world would be a healthier place if we didn't place so much ... emphasis ... on the idea of "do whatever it takes to succeed". Just look at what Airbnb did to succeed, for example.

Given the choice between a world without AirBnB and a few emails to Craigslist users about a better service, most rational people would vote for AirBnB to exist. The ends do justify the means. Just be sure your ends are defensible, and be prepared for blowback if you get too many people clutching their pearls in feigned outrage.

Because AirBnB have cured cancer? Or was it prevented genocide? Or something, like, worthwhile?

Most rational people don't give a flying toss whether Airbnb existed.

It's pretty obvious the ends did not justify the means. They're a reservations website, wake up, sniff reality and stop drinking the koolaid. Is it ok the aggravation they've caused to small business owners and the total lying. And that's ok because they did a few cereal packets once? Because they're 'naughty'?

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#49
post #45

After a few months I had a prototype and it actually worked. The application screen-scraped data, stored it in a database, presented it to the user, and then submitted data to an external system. Much better decision than hiring someone that could do it in a day.

Not sure if you are being sarcastic, so I am taking it as you were serious. There are arguments both for and against taking a few months to do it yourself when someone could have done it in day. He invested his few months and now he has the credibility and experience to implement the prototype himself, talk to technical founders, manage contractors and see through bullshit. On the other hand, if this was all his prot…

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic actually.

Re: Technical Co-founders Are Overrated

#50
post #27
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Being a successful entrepreneur means doing anything and everything it takes to get to success." I think the world would be a healthier place if we didn't place so much ... emphasis ... on the idea of "do whatever it takes to succeed". Just look at what Airbnb did to succeed, for example.

Given the choice between a world without AirBnB and a few emails to Craigslist users about a better service, most rational people would vote for AirBnB to exist. The ends do justify the means. Just be sure your ends are defensible, and be prepared for blowback if you get too many people clutching their pearls in feigned outrage.

It seems to me that sort of attitude leads to spam and "Tragedy of the commons" scenarios.

If everyone who thought they had "a better service" and were thus justified to send "a few emails to Craigslist users" the utility of Craigslist would be negatively impacted.

On that basis I would think the "rational person" might not find that sort of behaviour acceptable and would vote to preserve the resource.

Post reply on HN