81–90 of 199 posts
It seems that the kind of folks who are scared off by this might be doomed anyway. If you're going to be successful, then at some point you've got to take up the attitude that you're going to eat the competition's lunch - even if they know what you're doing. Because you're just that good.
Good luck.
(Have not applied. Am not applying. Just a member of the peanut gallery.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know it's verboten to talk about HN on HN, but it's fun clicking refresh and watching people upvote and downvote my comment. Talking about male prejudice in the tech community really gets under people's skin, including my cofounder bravura who said that maybe I shouldn't have posted and rankled people.
Yes, you're correct: people don't like being accused of being prejudice, especially in a community like this which prides itself on being open minded. Your gender isn't important here. Whether or not you're an entrepreneur with a plan, is. EDIT: This discussion really belongs in another thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know it's verboten to talk about HN on HN, but it's fun clicking refresh and watching people upvote and downvote my comment. Talking about male prejudice in the tech community really gets under people's skin, including my cofounder bravura who said that maybe I shouldn't have posted and rankled people.
Would you prefer to have gender hidden in the initial phase of the application?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well you are ignoring half of the potential problem. Even smart people have different opinions: what if an applicant thinks someone you chose to read their application is naive (or worse, an idiot)? Also seems just plain fair that applicants be aware of their audience.
Do you honestly feel PG and co. are incapable of selecting people that aren't naive nor idiots?
Do I think YC is capable of making poor selections?...Absolutely.
I feel like this is going to work against me - in a really serious way. First of all, I really liked knowing that I had a one in three chance of a woman, Jessica Livingston, reading my application. I liked how the application felt like a college application; they judge you based upon your potential and what you've done in your circumstances, not like an investor who says: "What experience and traction do you have?".…
Okay, so here's what I don't get: If you think the fact that you're a woman will somehow come out as a negative in the YC application process for you, how do you expect to survive as a startup? I guarantee you succeeding as a company is a lot tougher than filling out a form. Either what you're working on has merit or it doesn't. That doesn't change depending on who reads about it. I don't doubt that you have had chal…
The YC application seems to be more focused on who you are as a person than on your technology. I highlighted that on the application.
But I have a feeling that my accomplishments are not going to be as appreciated by a given YC alum than the original people that wrote the YC application. That's all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it's really not. At justin.tv we already have a list as long as my arm of great ideas that we don't have time to implement. Seeing a few more great ideas from a potential competitor wouldn't make much difference to us in my opinion.
that's probably true, hell Yahoo told Google to go screw themselves when they offered to sell them their tech. But the things asked in the application make you get pretty specific. Most people have trouble doing that for investors, let alone potential competitors. + it's not like they were told this before hand. They wrote the applications, thinking that pg and his team would review them.
That's because most people don't understand just how unimportant ideas are.
Seriously, even if pg & co decided that the next application process would be completely public, I still wouldn't consider it a big deal.
Anyone can say "I have an idea, I'm going to build X". Fewer can actually do it. Fewer still have the drive (masochism?) to keep trying and trying to get people to actually use it for months and months when it looks like nobody cares at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agreed, investors reading something is no big deal, since they aren't going to go out and use your ideas. A possible competitor reading it is a whole other story all together.
Actually it's really not. At justin.tv we already have a list as long as my arm of great ideas that we don't have time to implement. Seeing a few more great ideas from a potential competitor wouldn't make much difference to us in my opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it's really not. At justin.tv we already have a list as long as my arm of great ideas that we don't have time to implement. Seeing a few more great ideas from a potential competitor wouldn't make much difference to us in my opinion.
that's probably true, hell Yahoo told Google to go screw themselves when they offered to sell them their tech. But the things asked in the application make you get pretty specific. Most people have trouble doing that for investors, let alone potential competitors. + it's not like they were told this before hand. They wrote the applications, thinking that pg and his team would review them.
Remember, by applying, you are saying you trust the judgment of the YC team. If you don't trust their judgment, including when/when not to delegate, you are probably applying for the wrong reasons.
I mean, jeeze, you're asking them for money. They have been upfront about the change in the process, gave everyone a way to back out, said they'll be reading all applications themselves anyway... If you can't deal with changing and uncomfortable circumstances, why are you thinking about a startup in the first place?
(This is not just to the parent post, it is directed at the critics in this thread in general).