Live data from Hacker News

Why YC went to DC

ycombinator.com

281–290 of 407 posts

Re: Why YC went to DC

#281

This article is light on organizational and financial details. You don't just go to DC once, have some meetings, and announce what has to be done, if you're serious. You open a permanent office, meet with people on the Hill regularly, and spread campaign contributions around liberally. DC is crawling with people whose life it is to help you do that. Just drive around Chevy Chase and see all the luxury shops catering…

There's a not entirely rigorous, but empirically weighty analogy here to Silicon Valley. Why don't startups just fly into SFO, rent an AirBnB for a few days, hit Sand Hill Road, and split back to wherever overhead is cheaper?

> empirically weighty analogy

"Empirically" how?

in SV, the idea is that you can hire people to do almost anything a growing company needs. That's true in DC as well, but it's also that the important people who can decide your future are there and continually meeting with your enemies.

"If you're not at the table, you're on the menu." they like to say.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#282
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven’t seen any “Web 3” shills for a long time, gone right out of style it has!

Scroll back far enough on the X timelines of a few AI evangelists/specialists/advisers: oop, there they are. NFTs, Ethereum, altcoins.

Yeah I just assumed this was the case lol

Re: Why YC went to DC

#283
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of these, the Section 174 debacle (software R&D amortization) is arguably the problem that needs to be addressed most urgently.

Couldn't agree more. In the SMEs that I've been involved with, this has had a huge chilling effect on both hiring and innovation. I think that the change is a primary contributing factor to the layoffs and offshoring that have seized the market ever since. I'm not convinced that this wasn't the intent of the change in the first place.

How does this boost offshoring when offshore employees are penalized the most?

Re: Why YC went to DC

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of these, the Section 174 debacle (software R&D amortization) is arguably the problem that needs to be addressed most urgently.

Completely agree. I am a bootstrapped SaaS owner and we cleared about $1M in revenue, $1,200 in profit, and $90k in taxes. Bootstrapping a tech company in a post Section 174 world doesn’t even seem feasible. I can’t believe this issue isn’t being taken more seriously.

No one cares because most software developers are employed at big companies that can amortize. Even YC will probably just increase its seed instead of complain and consider it a "cost of business". This affects only marginal people. I am interested to talk with you about this if you want (feel free to reach, my email is in my profile).

Re: Why YC went to DC

#285
Big Tech has been allowed to operate with little scrutiny or oversight — to disastrous effects, in the form of social media harms, anti competitive practices, and more. Despite recent efforts to rein them in, a small handful of mega companies continue to wield enormous power in our economy and in Washington

Garry, I’m a bit confused. I totally agree with the sentiment, but isn’t YC part of the whole machine? Seed funding to VC to Wall Street IPO exit to big billion dollar corporation? Sam Altman is a product of YC culture, he ran the place, same as you do now.

I wanted to join YC in the past 12 years and applied multiple times. We never made it to the interview, but I have gotten an outsider’s perspective on the industry and the root causes of the problems you currently really want to solve with government. Instead what if I told you YC under YOUR leadership can solve them worldwide and far better? Hear me out…

Peter Thiel who invested the first $500K into Facebook famously taught that “competition is for losers, build a monopoly”, and I imagine the lessons to capture and extract maximum value from the ecosystem for shareholders has affected many founders, including Mark Z: https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-...

Mark Zuckerberg was an open source guy on the east coast. He open sourced Synapse instead of selling it to Microsoft. He wanted to make Wirehog, a peer to peer file sharing system, but Sean Parker and the VCs “put a bullet in that thing”. I was there at TC Disrupt in NY where Parker proudly told the story: https://techcrunch.com/2010/05/26/wirehog/

Sean Parker himself learned that lesson bitterly when his company disrupted a different but similar industry that was about owning and monetizing intellectual property - RIAA, MPAA, etc. After Napster was defeated he opened Plaxo and learned to play the “correct game”. He wanted to make sure Mark didn’t follow his open sensibilities too far, letting the public share stuff too freely, because shareholders need profit!

We are LUCKY that Mark Z still retains some of his original open source sensibilities because his company has been the only one giving away models trained for large amounts of money, to the community. Ok maybe Llama research edition leaked but they OWNED that thing, and became to openness what Apple is to privacy.

I mean when Silicon Valley Bank collapsed (set off by the same Peter Thiel), we found out that most VCs even banked at the same bank! There has been a LOT of centralization.

https://www.laweekly.com/restoring-healthy-communities/

This article goes into more depth than my post can, about how the incentives to enrich shareholders leads not just to enshittification of their own ecosystem but surveillance capitalism, and generally externalizing cost to society. Across the board! Teen girls have highest rates of depression. Adult men are on opiates and 20% of middle-aged women are on antidepressants. Elderly are in nursing homes and kids are in public schools (which pg once compared to prisons) and medicated for ADHD to sit still while their parents work long hours with less and less job certainty. Some even just do the gig economy, while Instacart ir Uber collects HALF of every driver’s fare for its shareholders!

Our society is perpetually angry now because algorithms select for more engagement, and it turns out clickbait and outrage maximizes it even more than sex. So the market selects for one sided stories that evoke outrage, and publishers pick an audience to pander to. While social network algorithms produce echo chambers and radicalization. And this is before we get to any AI bot swarms.

I believe there is ONE WEIRD TRICK that YC can do to help society at large A LOT over the next decade. I would like to see a way to transition shareholders organically to utility tokenholders before the public offering. Kind of like the differenc between Disney Dollars and shares of Disney Corp. Disney’s shareholders don’t live in Disneyworld and thus dont have the incentives that customers and workers do. They become an everpresent landlord class extracting rents forever, holding earnings calls even after the original investors had sold their shares. Same with other ecosystems.

The founders don’t need THAT machine necessarily, to be handsomely rewarded to the tune of billions of dollars and have the startups become worldwide movements that serve humanity. YC and VCs could still have their exits while preventing the parasitic rent extraction from getting out of control post-IPO. YC being upstream of most VCs could operate a HUGE lever, and like Archimedes, could move the world towards a better system, as you once did with SAFE notes! That’s would solve a lot of the incentive problems without the need for heavy-handed government regulation!

Two years ago, a different very ambitious and politically connected Sam — Sam Bankman Fried - also went around begging for his space to be regulated. But the incentives inherent in shareholder profits (instead of stakeholder accounting) and competition (instead of cooperation) are what leads to negative externalities, in many ways, and that includes pollution, ecosystem collapse, factory farms and much more. You guys can consider introducing that one SMALL change — transitioning shares to utility tokens gradually.

I would be very happy to come meet and explain more if it is of any interest. Just reply to my message and let me know how to reach out if you see potential here.

PS: In addition to utility tokens, open source and protocols help create maximum value for the world, through collaboration over competition. For decades, the US government wielded its mighty antitrust regulations over Ma Bell and the phone companies it split them into. And yet long distance calls were still $3 a minute. Then, VOIP open protocols democratized the pipes and turned the telcos into dumb replaceable infrastructure. It was open protocols that brought the cost of not just calls but video and broadcasting down to near-zero, something government couldn’t do. Wikipedia beat Britannica. The Web beat AOL and all closed systems. I could go on, but open and free beats closed in the end, AND each open platform (Linux, the Web, etc) leads to far more wealth creation than when gatekeepers extract rents. That’s another aspect. And meanwhile, since 2014 people have discovered that utility tokens can help to monetize open source and digital content including journalism, in healthier ways than ads and surveillance capitalism. As my VC friend Albert Wenger from Union Square ventures wrote a book along the same lines: https://worldaftercapital.org

Re: Why YC went to DC

#286
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gary is out of touch.

He's not just out of touch he's actively pushing pretty horrific shit like the abolition of the state. He also agrees with Balaji about everything and therefore should not be trusted.

"Abolition of the state"? In the very article this thread is about he pushes for regulation against big tech, that does not sound like it could be achieved by abolition of the state

Re: Why YC went to DC

#287

If you need more things to fix: * Software R&D Amortization - taxes on make-believe profits * Patent law - protect small businesses from patent trolls * Automate government-driven compliance standards - enable small businesses to sell into large companies/government entities, automatic certification when using pre-approved cloud solutions. * Healthcare insurance - employees of SMBs automatically get access to medicar…

Healthcare insurance - employees of SMBs automatically get access to medicare This puts you in the same company of abusing the system as Walmart, the nation's biggest welfare queen. Employers should just have to give health benefits. You want workers, you pay benefits. Period. Maybe then you all will get on board for a single payer system. Its what you want, but only in fits and starts. quit fucking around already.

Fuck that employers should be legally barred from offering health benefits. Combining the two might have been one of the worst things to happen the health system in this country.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#288
post #262
post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New drug funding tends to come from the US government already. Drug company R&D looks more like "what patents can we buy out and jack the prices in?"

That's simply misinformation. The US government funds some of the basic research that produces candidate molecules. But the vast majority of the cost in drug development comes in phase 3 human clinical trials. Almost all of that is paid for by pharmaceutical companies, and many trials fail.

At least according to ChatGPT, over 40% fail. If true that’s surprising, since you don’t start a Phase 3 unless a lot of very smart people are convinced it’s going to work, and lab results (including human) back that up.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#289
post #155
post #14

"This year, we’ll fund more than 500 companies out of 50,000 applications, and almost all of them are related to AI in some way." So, what this means: that in 2024, if you want to get VC capital, your startup must be related to AI.

I love the constant flex of their tiny acceptance rate. "We only accept 1% of applicants. Btw everyone should apply!" The collective man hours wasted on appe every year for what is essentially a lottery is insane.

For us, the application process was a big help in getting focus and better defining what we propose to build. And not getting in has led us to find some other, potentially much better programs which we will apply to. We don’t regret the effort at all.

My only complaint is that keeping everyone hanging on until May 29, ready to clear our plates in June, and then giving absolutely zero feedback for the rejection, was the sort of blatantly self-interested and founder-unfriendly move that, I suppose, it’s good to remember happens a lot in VC Land.

Re: Why YC went to DC

#290
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also prefer to see these standards go away. I haven't seen any proof they are providing meaningful security at any company I've been at and several of them have had massive hacks despite being SOC2 on paper. They also eat up InfoSec time instead of being productive on meaningful stuff like "Hey, are patching everything?" Most of these compliance just seem like barber licenses. A way for existing entities entrench…

Here here. The only thing SOC2 has done in my opinion is to create a multibillion dollar business that mainly just drains resources from companies that may not have them, with no guarantees you're actually secure. This usually devolves into security theatre where the CISO and underlings are putting in tools that drown teams with so much noise it's hard to detect the signal. The people running these programs rarely un…

I agree that regulatory compliance and industries around that can often be theater and it creates regulatory barriers that inhibit startups and competition generally but there must be some method of oversight to ensure that people can trust a system or company without needing to see the internals. For example, we trust our food is healthy because the firm that made it is authorized to do so by the FDA as they comply with the rules established by those regulators. Obviously there are flaws, loopholes, etc, and obviously software is different than health but to an extent we want some guarantees from an externally trusted actor. What is needed in the current SOC2 world that might solve some of the issues you outlined without getting rid of it, or the idea of it, entirely?
Post reply on HN