Don't change the world
micho.biz
Don't change the world
1–10 of 17 posts
Re: Don't change the world
#2Some of the points are valid, but you shouldn't generalize the situation. Very few people in the 90's woke up with the idea that they needed to be connected with someone on the other side of the world. But they eventually realized they did when they were shown the internet.
Yeah sometimes you don't need to be "disruptive", but sometimes you do. And it's especially hard to realize which is appropriate when you are building for a profit, a bit easier when you are building for change.
Re: Don't change the world
#3I have two main problems with this blog post:
1.) The example used - The increasing consumption of bottled water is observable and the options available to those entrepreneurs are reasonable. However the real question is this: who was the first successful entrepreneur to capitalise on the idea of bottling water? That person definitely changed the world.
2.) The repeated confusion between cause and effect - When Apple brought out their affordable personal computer it helped to kickstart the trend of personal computing. If that is not changing the world then what is?
Re: Don't change the world
#4I think the distinction isn't whether one changes the world and the other doesn't, it is whether one changes people and the other doesn't. Jake didn't change his customers. He predicted what they would do next. The demand for his product would exist whether it was him or someone else who was providing it. If no one else imported the new brand of water, the demand for Frank's product wouldn't exist. They'd be fine with their inferior quality bottled water. Frank experienced such resistance because he had to change his customers instead of anticipating what his customers would do anyways.
Saying that the change from tap to bottled water at home doesn't change the world seems kind of silly since it means that municipal water becomes less profitable. All the empty bottles which are thrown out and which go to landfills have an affect on the world outside of people. Whether people by brand A or brand B doesn't have much of an affect on the outside world. If anything, the post should be "Do change the world, don't change people".
Re: Don't change the world
#5Some of the points are valid, but you shouldn't generalize the situation. Very few people in the 90's woke up with the idea that they needed to be connected with someone on the other side of the world. But they eventually realized they did when they were shown the internet. Yeah sometimes you don't need to be "disruptive", but sometimes you do. And it's especially hard to realize which is appropriate when you are bui…
His point is that the ones that made the disruptive change like Netscape are not necessarily the ones that made the most money for the least effort. The people that saw the trend and momentum and went with it had an easier time and made more money more efficiently then the ones that actually changed the world. So even though there are counter examples you can't say they had an easy time of it or took the simplest path to success.
All that said, I don't find the kinds of startups he is encouraging as interesting.
Re: Don't change the world
#6Follow the advice in this post if you're looking for short-term profits and long-term mediocrity.
If you're in business just for the money, then the points in this post are valid. But, then you should probably also be concentrating your efforts somewhere else entirely. Give up software and become a loan shark or a banker or something.
If you're in business because the idea of doing anything else is boring and distasteful, if you admire people who set out to write a page of human history and accomplished it, then there is nothing of value at all in this blog post.
Re: Don't change the world
#7hmmm...interesting points
Re: Don't change the world
#8The real issue here is that there are (at least) two ways to go about starting a startup. You can go for changing the world, and in that case you must face the fact that you could fail and end up with a niche business. You can also go for maximizing profits. The latter may not result in a world change, or it may. It simply changes your focus. Failure is still out there—both of these approaches can lead a completely nuked business. Hell, both can lead to a niche business if you don't do them right.
Re: Don't change the world
#9> Consistently over time, the most successful entrepreneurs I’ve seen weren’t fighting the world – they were merely building the best sails to move faster than anybody else.
What causes the winds to change? There must be some new innovation for people to want sails in the first place (to butcher your analogy).
> That’s why Groupon clones are making millions a month with unoriginal ideas. The business model is already well understood and customers are familiar with it. The Groupon model is a trend that extends well beyond the company.
This is all true but ignores the fact that until Groupon started the social coupon trend, no companies made any money with this business model (because there were none, or none popular enough to matter).
> Those who built great iPhone apps at the time also know about these trends. Their success had more to do with a “force of nature” (millions of users thirsty for apps) than with their talent designing apps.
Again, yes, but no one wanted any apps (or even knew what an "app" was) before Apple decided to invent the iPhone.
Re: Don't change the world
#10Nobody likes "Don't change the world", but a lot of people love "Find and solve a customer's existing, urgent problem".