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

Be Relentlessly Resourceful

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 169 posts

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#101

Post by rfrankel »

I'm not sure I agree totally with Paul Graham's antonym choice -- the opposite of hapless when dealing with things might be named "resourcefulness", but when dealing with people "steadfast" might be closer to the feeling you want. Things need to be moved around, but when dealing with people often the most important action is to stand still -- to find a position and refuse to be knocked over or pushed around. This might be part of the reason it is so hard to find a proper antonym. It might also be why it is so hard to do.

Anyway, my fiancee asked me "of all the people you've ever met, who would best fit the 'not hapless' description the best?" I answered without hesitation "Sergey Brin."

Oh, he said, disappointed. "I mean someone who might be available to start a company with."

This observation would tend to support Paul Graham's thesis about the qualities you want in a founder, though.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#102

Post by eru »

chadgeidel wrote: post #82
netcan wrote: post #31

There is not, as some people seem to think, any economic upper bound on this number. I know that this is a side issue, but it keeps cropping up as a side issue in pg's essays. I would be interested in a more thorough discussion of this point.

I too, would like to see this discussed. There certainly is a PHYSICAL upper bound - that is the number of people living on the planet. What would the world be like if every man, woman, and child were an entrepreneur (maybe better put - a free agent)? It is certainly something to think about. Would we move to a barter system?

Why should we? Why should free agents be incompatible with money?

[Perhaps we'd get private money, though.]

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#103

Post by pg »

fleaflicker wrote: post #57

Recent PG quotes: 1. So probably the limiting factor on the number of startups is the the pool of potential founders. 2. ...and they think "anyone could have done it." But that isn't true; they are not ordinary people. 3. Angels are the limiting reagent in startup formation. #1 & #2 don't necessarily contradict #3. But it's interesting. I like to think relentlessly resourceful/animal/not dead founders are limiting re…

They're not quite contradictory. Number 1 is talking about the theoretical case where the economy reaches the maximum number of startups it can have, and number 3 is talking about the state of affairs now. At the moment, angels are the ingredient in shortest supply, but we are very early in the process.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#104

Post by pg »

time_management wrote: post #80
ericb wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Y Combinator probably makes up the 6% on the confidence boost associated with being selected, alone. Makes it hard to compare unselected/selected companies, I imagine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmalion_effect

Probably much higher. I'd bet that it's 50% at least. Aside from health insurance, one of the biggest hurdles to startup generation is the uncertain career effect. Being YC-funded essentially means that Paul Graham is vouching for your time. Think about college. Aside from the independently wealthy, no one would dedicate 4 years of life to study, given what would be the career costs of doing so-- an empty resume, a y…

Actually this has started to become a problem for us. When we first started and had no reputation, the only people who applied for funding were people who really wanted to start startups. Now we get people who are attracted by the idea of "getting into" YC. And it can be tempting to accept them, because people who've been using this m.o. tend to have accumulated impressive resumes. But when we do accept them they often do badly, partly because they didn't really want to be starting a startup, and partly because real world users are a different type of test than they're used to.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#105

Post by pg »

axod wrote: post #32
pg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I meant hapless, but as it's really used, not the obsolete definitions in most dictionaries. Hapless means bad stuff is happening to you. Helpless just means you couldn't defend yourself if it did.

Bear in mind some countries still use those 'obsolete' definitions ;) Maybe it's a US/UK thing.

I am a US/UK thing, so I feel like I'm in touch with how it's used in both places. Especially since it's mainly used in writing rather than speech.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#107

Post by dfranke »

pg wrote: post #99
gcheong wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people call you "PG" in real life?

Yep. Rtm and Tlb get called by their usernames too.

This seems like an MIT/Harvard thing. I've noticed that the people who call me 'dfranke' IRL, you included, tend to be affiliated with one of the two.

I think RTM is pretty much universally RTM though, whether or not the speaker has any Cambridge ties. I don't think I've ever heard any spoken reference to his full name.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#108

Post by menloparkbum »

aaronblohowiak wrote: post #100
cosmo7 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hap is a middle English word meaning luck or fate. Things happen, mishaps occur. Perhaps. Hapless means being in a situation with no logical way out, such as being stuck in quicksand, or being good at Ruby on Rails.

Can you please elaborate on why being good at RoR is being in a situation with no logical way out?

Can you please elaborate on why being good at RoR is being in a situation with no logical way out?

Sure. I learned Ruby on Rails about 3 years ago at a startup. I've since been trying to do other things for employment, but nobody wants to pay me to do anything besides Rails. Lucky for me, the economy has collapsed so nobody wants to pay me to do Rails, either.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#109

Post by axod »

pg wrote: post #105
axod wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bear in mind some countries still use those 'obsolete' definitions ;) Maybe it's a US/UK thing.

I am a US/UK thing, so I feel like I'm in touch with how it's used in both places. Especially since it's mainly used in writing rather than speech.

>> "Hapless means bad stuff is happening to you."

Fair enough, although I've never heard it used without meaning unlucky/cursed/doomed. In all the places I've seen it used it references some unlucky downtrodden person who has bad luck through no real fault of their own.

I can't quite remember, but I'm sure it's used in quite a few cartoons.

Re: Be Relentlessly Resourceful

#110

Post by gord »

I guess "Relentlessly Resourceful" is the same thing as "Get sh*t done".

(PGs 'being an animal' is the internal version, while GSD is external.)

I'm not sure it can be taught, after the age of five.

In my experience, it can be latent or simply turned off, usually by social norms [or schooling]. I've seen two cases where people really took off when they were simply given permission to 'GSD'. We managed to bypass a lot of organizational crud by effectively building a startup within a parent company, that was largely independent for the course of the project.

We used guerrilla tactics like stealing, ahem 'co-opting', people who we thought might be good if given a chance. I cringe to admit it, but we also used the unfortunate but necessary contrapositive of inventing nul sub-projects to keep non GSD people busy - those whom we had to have on board for political reasons, but who chose to basically just clock hours - so they wouldn't kill off other good work being done.

I guess in a startup, you publicly give yourselves permission to GSD [the whole S, and nothing but the S! :]

Post reply on HN