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

OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

overpaid.lol

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 395 posts

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#311

Post by dd8601fn »

antasvara wrote: post #305
dd8601fn wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah. We know what good looks like in financial results and reputation. It's really not that complicated. The rest of that bullshit isn't about evaluating a working company, it's about gamblers gambling on non-companies before they become real companies.

Sure, a college student can tell you if a company is making or losing money. But there are ample examples of "good" companies crashing because they didn't react to shifts in the market, which requires projecting into the future. Blockbuster was good until it wasn't. Sears was good until it wasn't. Barnes and Noble was good, then it fell apart, and now it's good again. The lesson to learn is that by the time your fina…

Yes, sometimes a healthy company will eventually have their business undermined by some future technology.

Except that's not what we were discussing.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#312

Post by blitzar »

raincom wrote: post #303
darth_avocado wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So when the corporations do something illegal why doesn’t this conduit go to jail or pay out of pocket for misconduct? Or is the said conduit only in play for all the convenient aspects of the job like firing people while taking millions in bonuses?

If a business is a two person shop, it is very easy to prove the culpability of a CEO. However, in a large corporation, it is very hard to prove the culpability of a CEO, as too many people are involved. That's why you see small business owners are easier to prosecute than CEOs of larger corporations.

it is very hard to prove the culpability of a CEO for anything bad

it is very easy to prove to the CEO earned the credit for all things good

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#313

Post by bko »

mikert89 wrote: post #122
bko wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investors aren't dumb. What does Ivy gain in this trade by just raising a lot of money and running it poorly? You think he can raise a huge round and just decide to pay himself $20m a year? Capital is not a moat. There are entire industries (VC, PE, Banks, etc) that are looking to write checks. Nothing would make them happier than to give you money, under the condition that there is significant upside (more VC) or as…

the world doesnt work like an efficient machine, and capital is far more of a moat than people want to admit. these "founders" are more like professional managers from the same backgrounds as the investors there is alot of beta involved, i.e. put 10M into payroll startup xyz, expect some rate of return.

Saying capital is a moat is not convincing.

From the vast amount of VC money going around, nearly half a trillion expected in 2026, not including other forms of funding, it's safe to say that there is a lot of capital for people that can execute.

I don't see how you can translate money to product/startup success. You think there's some magic lever you can press to get people to use your product? Selling $10 for $5 and building a market like that is rare (moviepass) but even that is incredibly difficult. Advertising is very inefficient and sales is hard.

https://dealroom.co/guides/global

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#314

Post by RunSet »

bob1029 wrote: post #234

I have learned that the purpose of a CEO in many (most?) companies is not to actually run the company. Their purpose is to be the human delegate that represents the corporate entity. They are empowered to act on behalf of the entire organization. This is important because a corporation of many individuals generally cannot act as one. You can sometimes get close with really, really good teamwork, but that's still not…

> Their purpose is to be the human delegate that represents the corporate entity.

A simulacrum of accountability to be replaced in lieu of ever acknowledging fault. No machine could ever replace a flesh-and-blood scapegoat.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#315

Post by 999900000999 »

ravenstine wrote: post #211
999900000999 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CEOs are also Fall Guys. A fall guy is the person who takes the blame when the whole thing falls apart. I’ve worked with exceptional CEOs at start ups. A startup CEO has to be a good sales person. They need to be able to make that final pitch to sell the company. Then everyone ideally cashes out and we’re all rich without the need to ever work again. It’s probably not going to happen, but I often dream of getting ric…

> CEOs are also Fall Guys. A fall guy is the person who takes the blame when the whole thing falls apart. Do you have an example of this? The usual criticism of CEOs is based on the exact opposite; that we are the fall guys, and that CEOs usually profit (and are rarely punished for) their own failed decisions. Looking back at all the companies I've worked for, I can't think of one time a CEO actually suffered blowbac…

Maybe this is more of a startup thing , but i remember the CEO personally apologizing to all of us when we shut down.

The buck stops somewhere.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#316

Post by throw1234567891 »

jdw64 wrote: post #18
throw1234567891 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in, you just want to go back to your comfort zone and not face the realities of life.

I don't want to have a staring contest with reality.

The best is to get on top of it.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#317

Post by ravenstine »

999900000999 wrote: post #315
ravenstine wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CEOs are also Fall Guys. A fall guy is the person who takes the blame when the whole thing falls apart. Do you have an example of this? The usual criticism of CEOs is based on the exact opposite; that we are the fall guys, and that CEOs usually profit (and are rarely punished for) their own failed decisions. Looking back at all the companies I've worked for, I can't think of one time a CEO actually suffered blowbac…

Maybe this is more of a startup thing , but i remember the CEO personally apologizing to all of us when we shut down. The buck stops somewhere.

Yeah, it's probably different when the CEO is a founder in some way. As an organization scales, leadership is replaced with non-founders, and blame becomes diffused, the nature of the C-level is just not the same.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#318

Post by seany »

conductr wrote: post #246
tonic_note wrote: post #204

Good satire. I find the "RTO is because of RE valuations" to be the most bizarre thing about the post pandemic work discourse. Office leases are a rounding error to large employers. They are not coercing employees back to the office because their worried about the value of a single portfolio asset falling (assuming they even own it). They are doing it because it's about power. Middle managers do not trust their staff…

I’ve been on Csuite of 3 orgs since the pandemic forced wfh normalization. Your correct the RE thing has always been a false narrative. I’ve never seen or read of it coming from an executive. To my knowledge, it was dreamt up by pundits, speculators, and is just a lazy attempt to understand what goes on in boardrooms driving these decisions. What I have witnessed, with empirical evidence, is that productivity and/or…

This is a bad take. There are plenty of orgs that were remote in some form or another way before covid. They're just organized and managed differently. It's 100% a management doesn't want to change issue.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#319

Post by ilaksh »

skinfaxi wrote: post #154
ilaksh wrote: post #148

Funny, but 2027 will actually be the year of the AI Companies run by AI CEOs. Obviously kind of early and hard to pull off still, but by the end of next year I think you will see a ton of people attempting it with at least partial success. There are already plenty of less serious attempts.

What does this mean in practice? Surely no AI-managed company could become public by way of lack of accountability and governance.

Obviously there will be a person nominally administering it and officially running it. But some of them will be really minimizing the human involvement.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#320

Post by qznc »

reinitctxoffset wrote: post #292
bob1029 wrote: post #234

I have learned that the purpose of a CEO in many (most?) companies is not to actually run the company. Their purpose is to be the human delegate that represents the corporate entity. They are empowered to act on behalf of the entire organization. This is important because a corporation of many individuals generally cannot act as one. You can sometimes get close with really, really good teamwork, but that's still not…

Claude is gaff-immune in 187 languages, never dips it's pen in the company ink, and can remember every calibrated nuance of guidance at every earnings call ever. It can impartially judge senior staff, provide updates to the board at any time, and personally interact with every customer. CEO seems like a great job for AI.

Sounds dangerous for liability reasons. Sometimes it is important to not write things down and have plausible deniability. Courts getting access to everything the CEO knows is not something a corporation wants.
Post reply on HN