Live data from Hacker News

The Equity Equation

paulgraham.com

101–110 of 160 posts

Re: The Equity Equation

#101
post #100
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a man is wrong, you don't need to tell him so. Just give it a rest and let others form their own opinions. Seriously, these issues, and a lot of other issues, are covered in "How to Win Friends and Influence People". Read it. If I could figure out a way to get you to feel like you came up with the idea to read it, I would, but I can't, so just read it.

Actually, if someone is wrong about math you probably should tell him so.

I agree. In private.

Re: The Equity Equation

#102
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're still wrong. I quote from the article: "For example, suppose Y Combinator offers to fund you in return for 6% of your company. In this case, n is .06 and 1/(1 - n) is 1.064. So you should take the deal if you believe we can improve your average outcome by more than 6.4%." If by "average outcome" you mean "expected value of the utility function", and assuming that my utility-of-money function is sqrt($), I…

If a man is wrong, you don't need to tell him so. Just give it a rest and let others form their own opinions. Seriously, these issues, and a lot of other issues, are covered in "How to Win Friends and Influence People". Read it. If I could figure out a way to get you to feel like you came up with the idea to read it, I would, but I can't, so just read it.

You should tell him he's wrong, but you shouldn't be a jerk or gloat about it, which cperciva wasn't.

Re: The Equity Equation

#103
post #102
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a man is wrong, you don't need to tell him so. Just give it a rest and let others form their own opinions. Seriously, these issues, and a lot of other issues, are covered in "How to Win Friends and Influence People". Read it. If I could figure out a way to get you to feel like you came up with the idea to read it, I would, but I can't, so just read it.

You should tell him he's wrong, but you shouldn't be a jerk or gloat about it, which cperciva wasn't.

No, really.. It is wise to never publically tell someone they are wrong, unless you're defending someone. You should wait until his friends and colleagues have left his side, then whisper your opinion into his ear. In the Internet world, that means sending him an email. To not do so is bad karma in every sense of the word.. My post above was modded down because I publically pointed out that he was wrong to point out Paul's percieved flaws in public; maybe I should have sent him an email instead. This wisdom is proven true over and over. My #lisp fiasco convinced me of that (long story).

Re: The Equity Equation

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a good idea, but already done, though. I use Carbonite to keep an online remote backup of my hard drive. They charge a fixed rate regardless of the capacity of the drive. Of course there is always space for competition, so if you think you can improve on their offering, then go for it.

If you use Carbonite, you're considerably braver than I am. Carbonite has no effective technological security, so you'd better hope that nobody breaks into their offices, none of their employees "go bad", and they're never confronted by a subpoena or have the PATRIOT act invoked against them; and they only keep the latest version of any file, so if you ever accidentally mangle a file you'd better hope that you can re…

Right, but they're secure enough for most people. Think about it, the chances that someone gets access to my own computer (stealing it, breaking into my home, or hacking it over the Internet) are higher than the chances of that happening to a professional service provider. At least that's the case for most computer users. I heard recently that 25% of all computers in the world are zombified. So much for security on your own computer.

But anyway, that's why I said if you can improve on their offering then go for it. Given the current options, they're the best that I know of; and I say that knowing that they have a lot to improve. So, if you build a better service, I'd consider switching.

Re: The Equity Equation

#105
post #103
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should tell him he's wrong, but you shouldn't be a jerk or gloat about it, which cperciva wasn't.

No, really.. It is wise to never publically tell someone they are wrong, unless you're defending someone. You should wait until his friends and colleagues have left his side, then whisper your opinion into his ear. In the Internet world, that means sending him an email. To not do so is bad karma in every sense of the word.. My post above was modded down because I publically pointed out that he was wrong to point out…

You're wrong to tell people they're wrong to publicly tell people they're wrong.

Most mature and intelligent people love it when someone is able to offer useful critiques of their work, as long as they're civil about it. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

Re: The Equity Equation

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I hope your startup idea isn't this: http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2006-09-13-encrypted-backup.... This post also shows a phenomenal misunderstanding of what it takes to create a successful software startup: http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2007-06-21-think-before-codi...

That is my startup idea. I don't want to take this thread even more off-topic (if that's even possible), but please feel free to contact me at the address in that first post to explain why you think it is a bad idea.

Interesting project, unfortunately I didn't found any way to enter in contact with you. You can contact me through my project web site http://www.disnetwork.info

I'll be glad to discuss this remote secure backup project with you. It was once on top of my list for a DIS application, but I dropped it for various reasons that I would be glad to share with you.

Re: The Equity Equation

#107
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is my startup idea. I don't want to take this thread even more off-topic (if that's even possible), but please feel free to contact me at the address in that first post to explain why you think it is a bad idea.

Interesting project, unfortunately I didn't found any way to enter in contact with you. You can contact me through my project web site http://www.disnetwork.info I'll be glad to discuss this remote secure backup project with you. It was once on top of my list for a DIS application, but I dropped it for various reasons that I would be glad to share with you.

His address is at the end of the blog entry in which he introduces his idea (the first of the links above).

Re: The Equity Equation

#108
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're still wrong. I quote from the article: "For example, suppose Y Combinator offers to fund you in return for 6% of your company. In this case, n is .06 and 1/(1 - n) is 1.064. So you should take the deal if you believe we can improve your average outcome by more than 6.4%." If by "average outcome" you mean "expected value of the utility function", and assuming that my utility-of-money function is sqrt($), I…

If a man is wrong, you don't need to tell him so. Just give it a rest and let others form their own opinions. Seriously, these issues, and a lot of other issues, are covered in "How to Win Friends and Influence People". Read it. If I could figure out a way to get you to feel like you came up with the idea to read it, I would, but I can't, so just read it.

I know you are well intentioned, but if I'm full of it I'd rather someone told me, preferrably in a respectful but blunt way. I'll form my own opinion anyway.

I know I took criticism personally and reacted very badly once or twice in the past, so I see your point. But I realised I was being a baby and grew from the experience. No speech on humility can make you humble. At best, it will convince you you should be humble, and maybe by acting humble some of it will sink in and stick. Real humility comes from realising your mistakes. [Edit:] That's painful at first, but necessary to get over your ego.

[PS: Sorry, I drifted into replying to other comments of yours, and the end result may be confusing.]

Re: The Equity Equation

#109
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're still wrong. I quote from the article: "For example, suppose Y Combinator offers to fund you in return for 6% of your company. In this case, n is .06 and 1/(1 - n) is 1.064. So you should take the deal if you believe we can improve your average outcome by more than 6.4%." If by "average outcome" you mean "expected value of the utility function", and assuming that my utility-of-money function is sqrt($), I…

Suppose your present hope of future utility from your startup varies linearly with the number of shares. (This is not a radical assumption; essentially all startup shareholders feel this, at least for numbers near that of shares they own.) Suppose you trade 6% of your stock in a deal that will increase your average future utility by 6.4%. You've made a straight trade of hope of future utility for future utility. We d…

Not to split hairs, but at different points you said

- that for essentially all startup shareholders, the present hope of future utility varies linearly with the number of shares, and

- that the utility function for most founders is a step function.

Both sound right to me separately, but don't they contradict each other? Maybe most founders just live with this paradox without realising?

Re: The Equity Equation

#110
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you're still wrong. I quote from the article: "For example, suppose Y Combinator offers to fund you in return for 6% of your company. In this case, n is .06 and 1/(1 - n) is 1.064. So you should take the deal if you believe we can improve your average outcome by more than 6.4%." If by "average outcome" you mean "expected value of the utility function", and assuming that my utility-of-money function is sqrt($), I…

Suppose your present hope of future utility from your startup varies linearly with the number of shares. (This is not a radical assumption; essentially all startup shareholders feel this, at least for numbers near that of shares they own.) Suppose you trade 6% of your stock in a deal that will increase your average future utility by 6.4%. You've made a straight trade of hope of future utility for future utility. We d…

IF the expected utility varies linearly with the number of shares (and thus the expected amount of money received in the end), you're absolutely right. But does it?

For large investment or VC funds, the utility-of-money function associated with any particular investment is almost linear. There's a very good reason for this: As far as Sequoia is concerned, a dollar earned from their Google stock is pretty much equivalent to a dollar earned from their Loopt stock. Not quite equivalent, since there are non-tangible advantages for a VC fund to have many smaller success stories instead of one Google; but close.

As you point out in http://www.paulgraham.com/vcsqueeze.html, founders aren't "rational" in the sense of having the same approximately linear utility-of-money function as VCs: "... letting the founders sell a little stock early would generally be better for the company, because it would cause the founders' attitudes toward risk to be aligned with the VCs'. As things currently work, their attitudes toward risk tend to be diametrically opposed: the founders, who have nothing, would prefer a 100% chance of $1 million to a 20% chance of $10 million, while the VCs can afford to be "rational" and prefer the latter."

There's another reason to think that most people have concave utility-of-money curves: The insurance industry. If you buy house insurance, you are lowering your expected number of dollars (because even ignoring market friction, the insurance companies have to make a profit), but raising your expected utility.

Post reply on HN