Live data from Hacker News

The best founders are futurists

josephwalla.com

41–50 of 81 posts

Re: The best founders are futurists

#41
post #37

I find that this article is representative of much of the content of HN these days: provocative assertions made by relative nobodies with little supporting evidence save anecdote, but made with the full voice of authority. Found a middling startup or two, and you're suddenly an expert. Call me old fashioned, but I like to get my blanket generalizations only from those significantly richer, more powerful, happier, or…

"Things have now gotten to the stage where I flinch slightly as I click on the "comments" link, bracing myself for the dismissive comment I know will be waiting for me at the top of the page." - PG

The quality of the comments is probably related to the quality of the content. Startup truisms and anecdotes-as-advertisements rarely stimulate interesting conversation.

Re: The best founders are futurists

#42
post #37

I find that this article is representative of much of the content of HN these days: provocative assertions made by relative nobodies with little supporting evidence save anecdote, but made with the full voice of authority. Found a middling startup or two, and you're suddenly an expert. Call me old fashioned, but I like to get my blanket generalizations only from those significantly richer, more powerful, happier, or…

You should watch Eric's intro about himself (about a minute in) [1] before filtering advice and opinion based on someone's success.

[http://vimeo.com/m/9964506]

Re: The best founders are futurists

#43
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A corollary is that both these claims can simultaneously be true: 1) most successful founders are futurists; and 2) most futurists are cranks.

So, the successful founders are futurists that are not cranks. And what would be the proportions of futurists that are not crank? That could be a good recipe to predict which founders will be successful...

Well, some might be cranks and also be successful. ;-)

Re: The best founders are futurists

#45
We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

Ha ha. I'm part of the problem.

But yeah, I think it's probably a good idea to have a vision of the future and strive to work towards building that, if you're lucky enough to be in a position to do anything about it, and hopefully your vision of a glorious posthuman utopia isn't my vision of a dehumanizing nightmare.

Re: The best founders are futurists

#46
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, the successful founders are futurists that are not cranks. And what would be the proportions of futurists that are not crank? That could be a good recipe to predict which founders will be successful...

Well, some might be cranks and also be successful. ;-)

(cough Nikola Tesla cough)

Re: The best founders are futurists

#48
post #32
post #7

This is a tautological claim. Of course with the benefit of hindsight, we can see that the biggest successes were those significantly changed the world... No way!? That's why they're successes! Lots, and lots of examples of people who similarly dreamed of changing the world with BIG ideas that completely failed. The bigger idea, the lower your probability of success, but with a larger potential return (both personal…

The funny thing about this article is that it cites one of the biggest flops as a sign of success. Dean Kamen might have said, if you live in the future, you won't drive short distances. He built Segway.

He just got the form factor wrong. Go to China and everyone rides electric scooterbikes for short trips (with payloads too).

America is so car-dominated that it's hard for this to catch on. If our cities had 10x the population and fewer parking spots (because space is at a premium), we would be doing the same.

In fact, we probably will get there within 20 years. I can't wait for a Tesla ultralight EV or motorcycle. But you'll see this first in Chungking or Mumbai.

Re: The best founders are futurists

#49
post #37

I find that this article is representative of much of the content of HN these days: provocative assertions made by relative nobodies with little supporting evidence save anecdote, but made with the full voice of authority. Found a middling startup or two, and you're suddenly an expert. Call me old fashioned, but I like to get my blanket generalizations only from those significantly richer, more powerful, happier, or…

Why is it important who has made the argument?

If it is a "blanket generalization" as you say, wouldn't it be more productive to quickly name a few counter examples? It should be very easy to do this no? On the other side, a rich and successful person can also be very bad at communicating his/her way of thinking.

I see this on HN more and more and it annoys me very much.

Re: The best founders are futurists

#50
post #37

I find that this article is representative of much of the content of HN these days: provocative assertions made by relative nobodies with little supporting evidence save anecdote, but made with the full voice of authority. Found a middling startup or two, and you're suddenly an expert. Call me old fashioned, but I like to get my blanket generalizations only from those significantly richer, more powerful, happier, or…

The irony is that HN upvotes light commentary with blanket generalizations to the front page and also upvotes cruel dismissive comments criticizing that sort of light commentary to the top comment.

If you live in the future pg-bot will be able to downvote trivialy negative comments
Post reply on HN