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

Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 127 posts

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#21

Post by markus_zhang »

scubbo wrote: post #14
davesque wrote: post #10

I think I've really gotten into the habit of disagreeing with Paul Graham's blogs lately but this one felt different. Felt like a lot of practical, common sense advice that is just barely beyond the horizon that most people consider. Of course, it won't apply in every situation but it felt hard to disagree with the overall sentiment. Note: I say I've been disagreeing with him lately and, of course, this blog wasn't w…

This was _precisely_ my reaction. "Life Is Short"[0] remains a great piece that I return to time-and-again, but most of his other stuff that I've read recently seems to miss the mark - unlike this one. [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html

This is a good one. I can immediately identify many "bullshits" in work and life. But I then realize that the key is that I need to have something to be passionate in so that those time saved from bullshits can be used on them.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#22

Post by diego »

kordlessagain wrote: post #15
davesque wrote: post #10

I think I've really gotten into the habit of disagreeing with Paul Graham's blogs lately but this one felt different. Felt like a lot of practical, common sense advice that is just barely beyond the horizon that most people consider. Of course, it won't apply in every situation but it felt hard to disagree with the overall sentiment. Note: I say I've been disagreeing with him lately and, of course, this blog wasn't w…

I’ll disagree then because Corp Dev, like most tags, can mean something else like a group at a corporation responsible for strategic decisions to grow and restructure its business, establish strategic partnerships, and/or achieve organizational excellence.

No, he's right on this one. Corporate Development means "the group in charge of acquiring companies." I have never seen a Corp Dev team that did anything else (and I have dealt with quite a few including my company's acquisition).

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#23

Post by sabj »

Points not covered in this piece, but worth noting: (1) If a counterparty is interested in you, it can help accelerate valuable partnerships you care about (2) You may want someone to invest in you, not to buy you; or you may want them to invest in you in the future

Now, for CorpDev, a conversation about investment is always a sliding scale... n% (invest) 100% (buy you). But whether it's from the corporate balance sheet or as a referral to the corporate VC arm, there can be value there, and value in the relationship building, depending on circumstances.

As with so much, the risk is not knowing what you want and getting carried along by the process -- lettings things "happen" to you. If you have a conversation with corpdev, you're trading some information and receiving some information. Is that ride worth the price of admission? You have to decide based on the circumstances. This piece has an edge that helps to provoke and draw attention to the themes (don't let others shape the narrative of your business engagement) and that's fine.

There are places and indicators that a CorpDev conversation is 200% M&A, and there are times when it has more BizDev dimensions. Many companies want to develop partnerships first to determine if a potential acquisition is accretive. And, those partnerships can actually be valuable to small companies, even if there have tricky strings that can trip you up. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#24

Post by rsj_hn »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #16
mistrial9 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

side note - I have some misc content that is http today in 2021 - I feel that the original HTML spec is better than modern web in some ways, therefore I like sticking to http here and there, when I chose, based on first principles

Old HTML might be fine, but sending it over an insecure connection isn't.

These words "secure" and "insecure" when used as synonyms for "encrypted" and "plaintext" obscure more than they illuminate and have done a lot of damage to the world of software security. They stop thought. You would not believe how many times I've talked to a company with some complex webapp and asked for their security policy and they respond with some statement about using TLS. It's absurd. Then even in books or standards, you are starting to see chapters called "security/cryptography". As if encrypting something was a type of security pixie dust.

I am not trying to relitigate the battle of SSL's naming scheme, that battle was lost, and now people associate "security" with encryption. Who knows, maybe in the future they will associate "security" with bitcoin. But it's certainly not true that every plaintext connection is an insecure connection in the sense of actual security. Not everything needs to be or should be encrypted, and many things obtain no benefit whatsoever from being encrypted.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#26

Post by enzanki_ars »

yellow_lead wrote: post #20
idbehold wrote: post #7

Is there a reason he doesn't have HTTPS on his site? Firefox throws up a giant warning when I try to visit.

Many read only sites don't have HTTPS. Firefox and other browsers are at fault for saying it's insecure.

For a good discussion into why _all_ websites should use HTTPS, I'd highly recommend this article.

https://www.troyhunt.com/heres-why-your-static-website-needs...

Not having your site as HTTPS puts all of your readers at risk. Even US ISPs like that of Comcast use this very same practice to inject warnings into insecure web traffic[0]. And like mentioned in the article, promises from ISPs not to use it for advertisements are just that, promises, and those can be broken in an instant.

[0]: https://gizmodo.com/comcast-to-customer-who-noticed-it-secre...

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#27

Post by tcgv »

idbehold wrote: post #7

Is there a reason he doesn't have HTTPS on his site? Firefox throws up a giant warning when I try to visit.

I actually sent him a cold e-mail in Nov/2020 on that matter to which he promptly replied (in less than 1h) that his site "just doesn't have https". So he's aware of that. IMHO it'd be a small effort for improving his readers experience (and security).

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#29

Post by jedberg »

kordlessagain wrote: post #15
davesque wrote: post #10

I think I've really gotten into the habit of disagreeing with Paul Graham's blogs lately but this one felt different. Felt like a lot of practical, common sense advice that is just barely beyond the horizon that most people consider. Of course, it won't apply in every situation but it felt hard to disagree with the overall sentiment. Note: I say I've been disagreeing with him lately and, of course, this blog wasn't w…

I’ll disagree then because Corp Dev, like most tags, can mean something else like a group at a corporation responsible for strategic decisions to grow and restructure its business, establish strategic partnerships, and/or achieve organizational excellence.

The only reason Corp Dev is establishing a partnership is because they want to buy you but they aren't sure yet, so it's like a trial. It's also a good way to convince you to sell to them while also locking out competitors.

If you have a partnership with Google, it makes a lot harder for Amazon to buy you because first they have to unwind the partnership.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev (2015)

#30

Post by irrational »

>"What happened to Don't be Evil?" I asked. "I don't think corp dev got the memo," he replied.

Why is it that every company that starts with good intentions eventually succumbs and becomes that which they claimed to not like?

Post reply on HN