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

The Future of Web Startups

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 173 posts

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#121

Post by ken »

imsteve wrote: post #60
ken wrote: post #51

Paul, you always speak of acquisition of a startup by a big company. What possibilities exist for startups merging? Is it common, or do you expect it to be? I know a couple other startups in my town (one of your big 3) who do similar things to my startup. Thanks to the public (link-happy!) structure of the web, we already let people go from one to the other: a loose ad-hoc integration. Will this be the future of coop…

> What possibilities exist for startups merging? Sure they can merge, but this is not an "exit". As far as I know, the purpose of a startup is a successful exit of some type.

It is if they do it a couple times. Ever try folding a piece of paper in half 5 times? It's how Google might have formed, if they had started acquisition instead of interview-hiring sooner.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#122

Post by thomasptacek »

"We know because we make people move for Y Combinator, and it doesn't seem to be a problem. The advantage of being able to work together face to face for three months outweighs the inconvenience of moving. Ask anyone who's done it."

Hello, Paul. I'm selection bias. We haven't met formally, but you're obviously acquainted with me.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#123

Post by gregac »

It's always been less risky (though perhaps harder) for younger people to forsake a corporate job and do a startup. They have less to lose. So if the degree of "courage" needed to do startup is going down, doesn't that suggest more older people with families and corporate jobs doing startups? (not that's mutually exclusive with more young nerds. more startups means more founders...of all types).

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#124

Post by gregac »

swards wrote: post #117

Can't agree with the "Younger, nerdier founders" section. It's like any other long tail, in this case the prototypical founder (late 20', single, technical guy) will not be as common - it'll become a more-diverse population. There will be younger founders and there will be older founders, too. Nerdier, and hipper. Etc. For example, I'm a 40 yo front-end developer (started in 1995 building interactive apps at ESPN). I…

Agreed. As per below. You probably know that Fred Wilson stirred up the "age of founders" issue a few months back. I'm curious to find some data on age/general demographic trends re: founders.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#125

Post by stuki »

far33d wrote: post #78
electric wrote: post #6

What Paul ignores is the fact that most people out of college are faced with seemingly insurmountable debt as a result of having to pay for an education - esp. in America (and to a lesser extent in Canada). This is one problem that will prevent startups from happening at such a rapid pace as he anticipates. In fact, most graduates want to find stable jobs to pay off their debt -- startups are not really on most gradu…

This is one of those ways in which being a rich kid is a huge advantage. I'm not sure if most young startup founders have rich parents, but it wouldn't be particularly surprising. Then again, maybe having rich parents makes it too easy to just coast in a cruddy job (or grad school)...

Another big advantage for Silicon Valley: Rich (from tech or real estate) parents supportive of playing around with computers instead of getting a real job.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#126

Post by byrneseyeview »

timr wrote: post #73
byrneseyeview wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economics drives human rights. For reference, see the conditions of the 19th century farms people fled to go work in those factories. See also: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118134633403829656.html?mod=... And I don't understand what you mean about laws being proof that people feel this way. I assume that the proof that people feel a certain way is that they act that way. For example, if I think being a coal miner…

I don't understand why you keep posting comments that begin with "I don't understand", and then proceed to make an argument about the comment that you profess not to understand.

I've found that sometimes, people refuse to say exactly what they mean because it's so absurd. So they write vague, pleasant nonsense about how "human rights trump economics." What is that supposed to mean? Economics is the study of what people want and how they get it -- how can it be 'trumped' by one set of things people want. It's a malformed argument. I wondered if the commenter would explain exactly what he was trying to say.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#127

Post by byrneseyeview »

run4yourlives wrote: post #87
byrneseyeview wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economics drives human rights. For reference, see the conditions of the 19th century farms people fled to go work in those factories. See also: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118134633403829656.html?mod=... And I don't understand what you mean about laws being proof that people feel this way. I assume that the proof that people feel a certain way is that they act that way. For example, if I think being a coal miner…

Want to know what else those conditions led to? death, disease, revolution, communism, fascism and war. >For example, if I think being a coal miner is too risky, I won't be a coal miner. Unless of course you're not in the position to make that choice. You are speaking from a position of privilege and assume all share that privilege. It leads to only a half understanding of why we've instituted the systems we have. >W…

Shit. I thought death, disease, revolution, communism (read Acts), fascism (which was an attempt to revive Rome) and war all predated the Industrial Revolution. In fact, the actual research I've read (http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/pinker07/pinker07_index.html) demonstrates clearly that those are declining as we industrialize. But I'm sure you meant to cite your own source. I'm waiting.

" You are speaking from a position of privilege and assume all share that privilege."

Pleasant nonsense. Why should my status change the validity of my arguments? I have an idea -- let's ask a black high school dropout (http://www.tsowell.com/) if he agrees with me! Then let's decide that an individual's 'privilege', whatever that means, isn't as important as making a reasonable argument backed by data.

"If you were right in your theory, the nation you live in (assuming you're American) wouldn't exist right now."

If I were right in my theory that depriving people of freedom in order to force them to make decisions they're going to make anyway (at best!) is a bad idea? I don't see how my rightness would affect American politics. Do you mean that if more people agreed with me, the world would be different? Are you confusing my perscriptions and historical descriptions? Please clarify.

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#128

Post by byrneseyeview »

electric wrote: post #48
byrneseyeview wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the point of your original post? It looks like you were saying "It is better to have a college education than to spend that time or money in any other possible way." But you keep saying that like it's a bad thing, and talking about how college reduces your chances of starting a startup because it's so expensive. If college increases your chances of starting a startup, and you want to start a startup, your or…

What I was saying is that paying for the education that gives you the tools to start a startup is one of the biggest impediments to starting one.

I'm really having trouble following this. You're saying that your odds of success after getting an education are higher than before. But that, uh, getting an education makes it harder to start a startup. You see the contradiction.

Is this like saying "If you're going to be a programmer, you'll do better to buy a computer. But if you buy a computer, you'll have to get money, which leaves you less time to be a programmer!"?

Re: The Future of Web Startups

#129

Post by stuki »

davidw wrote: post #104
byrneseyeview wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's suggesting that they could be accused of it. Startups are disproportionately started by men, most of whom are white or Asian. Paul Graham says not to blame on malice what you can attribute to math, but other people might not see it that way. "I'm playing devil's advocate far further than intended for sure, but the laws regarding employment, although bureaucratic are there for very good reasons." What is…

I'll take a stab at this. I recently read one of Milton Friedman's books, and I liked it a lot. His pursuit of freedom is admirable, and something that I can understand. He even suggests that freedom is more important than using government power to attempt to stop racism, for instance by letting people choose not to hire black people (as an example). That got me to thinking though. While I'm attracted to the sentimen…

Just imagine the level of job candidates you could be selecting amongst if you were the only one hiring from a population as big as the black community. In any competitive field, employers are fairly limited in how 'racist' they can be in their hiring practices without setting themselves up for a fall.
Post reply on HN