New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies • Hacker News Board

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#41

Post by 6thSigma » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:19 PM UTC

I would assume companies applying to this RFS would be mostly in their later stages and probably already have some type of funding. A lot of these seem to require significant costs up front.

One thing that makes YC and other incubators so amazing is people who didn't grow up with a wealthy family and have financial obligations such as student loans can hack together a prototype over a weekend, apply to YC, and have almost as good of a chance of getting in as anyone else. I can totally see why YC would want to fund later stage companies though.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#42

Post by mullingitover » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:21 PM UTC

marvy wrote: post #33

mullingitover wrote: post #22

> Throughout history, when the cost of energy has come down a lot (for example, with the steam engine) I'm going to have to review my physics textbook, but I could swear that steam engine consumes energy. edit: Can't believe I'm getting downvoted. I thought this place was full of pedantic engineers, like me? The steam engine turns energy into work. If anything, it probably increased the price of energy (at least temp…

I think you know what he meant. But just in case: the steam engine allowed people to harness energy that would have been impractical or even impossible to harness without it.

I totally know what he meant, but he's wrong--the steam engine likely increased the price of energy, at least in the short term, but creating increased demand for it.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#43

Post by deepinsand » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:22 PM UTC

I would imagine that these types of startups don't work with YC's traditional valuation and round sizes. I hope they start changing the terms, especially as they now have enough data to find a better "break even" number.

For instance, I'm tackling energy economics, and doing business development alone in this industry dwarfs YC's round.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#44

Post by dsugarman » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:26 PM UTC

tlb wrote: post #8

dsugarman wrote: post #2

SpaceX and Tesla were really possible because of the large amounts of money that Elon put into the companies, it is estimated that Elon invested $100MM into SpaceX. his extremely impressive resume was not enough to receive the level of funding to get the company off the ground (get it?) how can a first time entrepreneur actually receive substantial investment without putting in such a large personal investment?

Many first-time entrepreneurs have raised more than $100M. They started with small amounts and showed great results at each stage.

I 100% agree when it comes to software, but if we are talking about long term ground breaking technology.. how can you start a spaceship company without a $100M initial investment? what results can you show at an early stage?

it's an honest question and I think about this all the time. If you can solve the funding issue, I would bet a lot more people will choose the more ambitious projects. What can a spaceship company accomplish with $100k?

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#45

Post by infocollector » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:26 PM UTC

Another YC Advertisement?

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#46

Post by theuri » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:27 PM UTC

I can't help but feel there's a few major gaps on this list - helping reinvent financial services, and using technology to improve lives in developing economies

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#47

Post by buro9 » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:30 PM UTC

> Of particular interest to us are ways to use the Internet to fix government—for example, crowdfunding social services.

I have an unannounced goal in my projects to achieve something bigger than this... to use the internet to change political systems, the structure of them and how populaces engage with them.

I think it has to be fait accompli though, already done. It will take a generation to achieve fully and putting it in a pitch deck or advertising it before it's done is only going to allow people to attack it before it's taken root.

I truly believe this is possible and achievable. But when I share the plan (in person, not on the internet) and get passionate about politics, a few are inspired and believe... and most think I'm off-the-planet crazy (though they don't think it's unachievable).

Fait accompli... I need to get it done for it to be already done.

I believe the company is going to be successful, make a huge return for investors, and change the lives of users (I've seen that first-hand already). But I also believe it can be a trojan horse for a set of ideas that can change societies and how we choose to be governed.

I'd largely got to the point where I wasn't going to consider YC, but if they're serious about this one and can be more ambitious, I might be tempted to apply.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#48

Post by Q6T46nT668w6i3m » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:32 PM UTC

deepinsand wrote: post #43

I would imagine that these types of startups don't work with YC's traditional valuation and round sizes. I hope they start changing the terms, especially as they now have enough data to find a better "break even" number. For instance, I'm tackling energy economics, and doing business development alone in this industry dwarfs YC's round.

Agreed

$20,000 for 2-10% of investment isn’t particularly attractive when you need to raise an enormous amount of money. Moreover, Y Combinator doesn’t have partners with relevant experience in most of these markets.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#49

Post by garry » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:36 PM UTC

bfe wrote: post #35

This sounds terrific, but it doesn't seem self-consistent between wanting companies with the scale of ambition of SpaceX and Tesla, but insisting on early momentum being critical and avoiding a big and expensive initial project. Tesla took four years to introduce their first product, the Roadster. When they went public two years later, they had gone through a net loss of around 300 million dollars, and were still two…

Both Thalmic Labs and the Meta project are examples of longer term projects that raise money through YC. There are a bunch more in the current batch that have a much longer time frame. While the three month demo is a constraint, it is not one that kills ambitious projects at YC.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#50

Post by Crito » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:40 PM UTC

dsugarman wrote: post #2

SpaceX and Tesla were really possible because of the large amounts of money that Elon put into the companies, it is estimated that Elon invested $100MM into SpaceX. his extremely impressive resume was not enough to receive the level of funding to get the company off the ground (get it?) how can a first time entrepreneur actually receive substantial investment without putting in such a large personal investment?

Was Elon's resume impressive back in 2002 when he was starting SpaceX? That was before even Tesla, so as far as I can tell back in 2002 his resume had a BS in Economics, a BS in Physics, X.com, and Paypal.

Normally that would be plenty impressive, but I don't think that is a particularly impressive resume for somebody looking to start a rocket company. The connection between Paypal and space exploration isn't exactly strong, even with an undergraduate degree in physics. I suppose he could also put "hassled Russians for a decommissioned ICBM" on his resume too though. ;)