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

How Universities Should Prepare Founders

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 333 posts

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#51

Post by asa123 »

yieldcrv wrote: post #33
jspann wrote: post #25

(Disclosure: I'm getting a PhD in CS now) > The hard part of startups is product: knowing what to build, and being able to build it Funny enough, this is why I think a PhD is undervalued by many. You spend years focused on a single area, sometimes pivoting topics, and getting hands on experience with operating solo on the outskirts of a particular field. The overall point of the degree is you learn how to learn. The…

> Funny enough, this is why I think a PhD is undervalued by many no, the opportunity cost is too great for this field, for people that saw the light in just undergrad or wound up building software for other people without an undergrad CS degree

the moment you start talking about opportunity cost, I think you've already ducked the intent of the majority of startup-strategizers-for-exponential-gains-only, for which the carrot on the stick is "unbounded" gain

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#53

Post by clipsy »

dang wrote: post #45
clipsy wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Gross." remark (Edit: now removed) at the end was unnecessary, but the bulk of the comment seems like a pretty legitimate question to me. It's telling that I see far worse HN comments on a daily basis that don't warrant a finger-wagging condemnation from you.

It's telling of the fact that we don't see most, or even 10%, of what gets posted here. There's far too much to read. If you see a post that ought to have been moderated but hasn't been, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I don't expect you to read everything, but your choice of what to call out is still telling. If you truly think this is the sort of comment that needs direct intervention, I'd politely suggest you should set aside 2-3 hours per week to read comments on /new posts.

To be clear: I do not have the time or energy to back this up statistically, but my experience is that you are substantially more likely to choose to get involved in threads/comments that challenge startup culture than you are in threads/comments that embrace bigotry, conspiracy theories, and other genuinely appalling content.

Edit: To elaborate a bit and put a final touch on this before I call it a night, the problem isn't that I see you condemning comments like this; it's that I rarely-to-never see you condemning substantially worse comments. It seems to communicate a clear choice to allow repugnant behavior as long as it doesn't criticize startup culture/founder worship.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#54

Post by bruce511 »

srveale wrote: post #20

The article advocates lighter course load so ambitious undergrads can work on personal projects, some of which (preferably for the author) would be startup ideas. Glossing over the fact that ambitious undergrads are more likely to be ambitious about grad school rather than starting a company, and reducing their course work is a hindrance if anything. The goal of a physics degree is not to prepare you to start a busin…

Paul does seem to be somewhat aware that his thesis is "optimize for founders at everyone else's expense".

I mean, if you want the university to churn out plumbers then by all means do plumber things.

I'm somewhat less sure that optimizing for founders turns out better, or even more, founders. Ultimately probably 1% or less of people start a business (of any form, much less venture capital financed.)

You can't give people time and expect them to "create". Creators create not because it's convenient, they create in spite of it being inconvenient. They find the time regardless. (And universities already have scads of free time.)

95% of startups will fail. That statistic does not cause a founder to retreat. And that perseverance when the odds are poor is exactly why some succeed.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#55

Post by fyredge »

vehemenz wrote: post #48
fyredge wrote: post #37

I disagree with the underlying assumption that it's the universities responsibility to cultivate founders. Universities were initially built to further the knowledge of specific fields, for the sake of its own advancement, producing philosophers, artists and scientists. In other words, universities are for people to learn for the sake of learning, not to earn a wage. New institutions should be built to cultivate foun…

That’s compatible with the thesis though. Read past the headline. He says good founders learn actual stuff at college and get good at something, without any ambition to make it profitable initially.

It's... not? He's describing how to cultivate founders in university. I'm saying that it's not what a university should be focused on.

A startup is not a technical project, it's an organisational endeavour. They don't live or die by the product alone, but by the market demand, organisational robustness and a little bit of luck.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#56

Post by Animats »

glenngillen wrote: post #41
jspann wrote: post #25

(Disclosure: I'm getting a PhD in CS now) > The hard part of startups is product: knowing what to build, and being able to build it Funny enough, this is why I think a PhD is undervalued by many. You spend years focused on a single area, sometimes pivoting topics, and getting hands on experience with operating solo on the outskirts of a particular field. The overall point of the degree is you learn how to learn. The…

In hindsight it was quite early in my career, but a bit over 20 years ago I felt burnt out in tech and wanted to try something new. I was share trading quite a bit so thought maybe I'd become a stock broker (online trading was only just starting to become a thing, so being a broker was still a real job at the time!). I finished the degree and got qualified, and while I loved the learning I discovered I hated the indu…

To sell is human; to scam, divine.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#57

Post by kensai »

dgudkov wrote: post #39

> Startups succeed or fail based on how much customers like the product. This is in theory. In practice, a worse product with more money and louder marketing easily wins against a better product nobody knows about. I'm sure Paul perfectly understands it. There are other idealizations I won't comment on, but the whole piece reads like an attempt to nurture an application pipeline for YC rather than the genuine writing…

the most pragmatic approach indeed!

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#59

Post by scottfits »

One thing I agree with and one I disagree with:

- I've always thought it was silly my university had an Entrepreneurship major. Starting a company is probably much better achieved by studying something technical or going deep into a problem space and seeing a problem there, not a generic "entrepreneurship" curriculum.

- I think startups starting as side projects was more of an artifact of the early YC days where startups could just be simple software that some engineers built on nights and weekends. Increasingly I feel like the next generation of startups is more capital intensive and requires more time commitment from deeply technical talent. Not in 100% of cases obviously.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#60

Post by Upvoter33 »

pilingual wrote: post #36

Mark Zuckerberg was good at programming, but he was a psychology major, not a CS major. "For Zuckerberg, the school’s major selling point was its Latin program. The current computer science concentrator originally intended to study classics at Harvard."[0] There's a book called Founders at Work by one J. Livingston. I'd suggest replacing Zuckerberg with an incredible founder who was interviewed in that book, Steve Pe…

What about Page? Brin? Etc.
Post reply on HN