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

Jessica Livingston (2015)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#191

Post by bushwald »

Jun8 wrote: post #107
fairity wrote: post #27

> No one understands female founders better than Jessica. But it's unlikely anyone will ever hear her speak candidly about the topic. She ventured a toe in that water a while ago, and the reaction was so violent that she decided "never again." I wonder how much wisdom has been lost bc of this effect. I feel like society needs to create a much larger incentive for thoughtful people to share their wisdom. Today, you st…

For the curious, I think this is what pg is referring to: https://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-b... (so glad that “news site” is dead BTW). He made some Summers-like foray on female founder’s abilities, I remember it was a big deal at the time, now I don’t know if many people remember it (note to self about any moral battle du jour that seem so important). I have no data to back this up but alwa…

Wow. Now I really don't understand the cult-like reverence for PG on here. That he begins his post about Livingstone by referring to her as the "mom" of YC corroborates the Gawker piece in my mind.

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#192

Post by detaro »

bushwald wrote: post #191
Jun8 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the curious, I think this is what pg is referring to: https://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-b... (so glad that “news site” is dead BTW). He made some Summers-like foray on female founder’s abilities, I remember it was a big deal at the time, now I don’t know if many people remember it (note to self about any moral battle du jour that seem so important). I have no data to back this up but alwa…

Wow. Now I really don't understand the cult-like reverence for PG on here. That he begins his post about Livingstone by referring to her as the "mom" of YC corroborates the Gawker piece in my mind.

"cult-like reverence"? People love making fun of PG here

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#193

Post by tshaddox »

fairity wrote: post #27

> No one understands female founders better than Jessica. But it's unlikely anyone will ever hear her speak candidly about the topic. She ventured a toe in that water a while ago, and the reaction was so violent that she decided "never again." I wonder how much wisdom has been lost bc of this effect. I feel like society needs to create a much larger incentive for thoughtful people to share their wisdom. Today, you st…

I’m not familiar with this incident, and if it was truly violent then I agree that it’s tragic and likely to result in a loss of valuable voices.

But all too often people express opinions publicly, then receive criticism of those opinions publicly, and conclude “wow, these days you can’t even express opinions any more.” This is especially common with wealthy and/or powerful people who are not accustomed to receiving criticism from the public.

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#194

Post by saeranv »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #189
saeranv wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay fair enough, but why look at female founders in terms total valuation percent, then? I think my point about the distortion from the (likely) exponential distribution of total valuation still stands, although in this case with regards to comparison between VCs. Isn't it straightforward to just look at percent of female founders?

> Isn't it straightforward to just look at percent of female founders? Totally agreed. I couldn't find the numbers though.

To your credit, at least you got data to begin investigating your claim. I'm usually to lazy to do that...

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#195

Post by burnished »

mandmandam wrote: post #93
burnished wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the phrase 'pearls before swine' refer basically to this situation? Basically I don't think it's something you can do in the presence of a thing like twitter because of the participants whose goal isn't communication. Which is fine. The wisdom isn't lost, its just not as widely available.

> Which is fine. The wisdom isn't lost, its just not as widely available. It's not fine though. Our political and economic spheres have been run by the swine for too long, and the planet's back is breaking. The second order effects of only giving the brash and thick-hided a voice in society are everywhere, causing permanent harms. Let's start making space for the wise and sensitive types, and make pearls abundant.

Sure, I'd laude you for pursuing that mission.

You seem to be implying that this is a recent phenomenon of some kind though and I don't think it is. Just something to keep in mind! Not intended in the spirit of a damning critique or reason not to try.

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#196

Post by mandmandam »

burnished wrote: post #195
mandmandam wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which is fine. The wisdom isn't lost, its just not as widely available. It's not fine though. Our political and economic spheres have been run by the swine for too long, and the planet's back is breaking. The second order effects of only giving the brash and thick-hided a voice in society are everywhere, causing permanent harms. Let's start making space for the wise and sensitive types, and make pearls abundant.

Sure, I'd laude you for pursuing that mission. You seem to be implying that this is a recent phenomenon of some kind though and I don't think it is. Just something to keep in mind! Not intended in the spirit of a damning critique or reason not to try.

> You seem to be implying that this is a recent phenomenon of some kind though

Pretty recent, in the scheme of things - only the last few thousand years or so.

I do think we can turn it around; I mean, we fuckin better.

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#197

Post by fragmede »

scg wrote: post #168
fragmede wrote: post #103

I wonder what her Social Radar picks up off cryptocurrency-adjacent individuals. Because she's seen their pitches to YC. And that Social Radar of hers should get a good read on crypto bros. And so the question is how many of them are grifters and con artists trying to cash in on the next Bitcoin, and how many of them are true believers of the ideals being spouted. And how many of them are, actually, honestly, good pe…

Can you point to a single YC crypto / "cryptocurrency-adjacent" company that is a "grift"?

I don't follow the YC applicant space that closely. Is every rejection posted publicly? Cryptocurrencies do have some true believers, but there are also some of those that aren't. Hence by sheer statistics, we'd be safe to assume they exist in the YC applicant pool.

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#198

Post by deanCommie »

fairity wrote: post #27

> No one understands female founders better than Jessica. But it's unlikely anyone will ever hear her speak candidly about the topic. She ventured a toe in that water a while ago, and the reaction was so violent that she decided "never again." I wonder how much wisdom has been lost bc of this effect. I feel like society needs to create a much larger incentive for thoughtful people to share their wisdom. Today, you st…

I wonder how much wisdom has been lost bc people don't ask follow-up questions to statements like this?

Questions like "What did she actually say?" and "What was the reaction?"

Luckily both have been answered in the comments and it's a bit more clear that not everything someone feels is worth sharing is automatically "wisdom".

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#199

Post by crashingintoyou »

Might as well link Jessica Livingston's post at https://foundersatwork.posthaven.com/the-sound-of-silence

Its' start: """ I recently heard one of the more interesting insights about Silicon Valley I'd heard in a while. It explained something I’d wondered about for years.

But I can't tell you what it was.

There's too much downside in sharing any opinion that could easily be misinterpreted online. Even facts are dangerous to share if they don’t align with what people want to believe.

There's a lot of concern about "fake news" lately. That is a real problem, but there's also the opposite problem: true things that aren't being said.

Some of the most useful things I've learned about startups over the years are also things I'd never share publicly. Not because the ideas are necessarily controversial in their own right, but because anyone could twist them to seem controversial if they were sufficiently motivated to. And when that happens I immediately regret having said anything. It's a massive distraction. I have two young kids, and I have hundreds of startups to keep track of. I don't have time to fight with people who are trying to misunderstand me. """

Re: Jessica Livingston (2015)

#200

Post by crashingintoyou »

tshaddox wrote: post #193
fairity wrote: post #27

> No one understands female founders better than Jessica. But it's unlikely anyone will ever hear her speak candidly about the topic. She ventured a toe in that water a while ago, and the reaction was so violent that she decided "never again." I wonder how much wisdom has been lost bc of this effect. I feel like society needs to create a much larger incentive for thoughtful people to share their wisdom. Today, you st…

I’m not familiar with this incident, and if it was truly violent then I agree that it’s tragic and likely to result in a loss of valuable voices. But all too often people express opinions publicly, then receive criticism of those opinions publicly, and conclude “wow, these days you can’t even express opinions any more.” This is especially common with wealthy and/or powerful people who are not accustomed to receiving…

Jessica Livingston's own words (https://foundersatwork.posthaven.com/the-sound-of-silence)

"""Not surprisingly, the juiciest targets for this sort of willful misinterpretation are organizations and people who are successful. They have power, and power makes them both interesting and envied; I teach founders they all have to be prepared for this as their startups grow.

In my blog post, "Subtle Mid-Stage Startup Pitfalls" I said:

       You can't prevent yourself from being a target. It's an automatic
       consequence of being successful. So the best you can do is react
       in the right way when people attack you. To some extent you have
       to resign yourself to letting people lie about you.
The problem with this is, the most successful people in an industry tend to have some of the most valuable insights about it. So you lose a lot when they are silenced. And also, if they keep those insights to themselves, it makes the powerful more powerful. It means useful information remains amongst insiders, like me, for example."""
Post reply on HN