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

The default state of a startup is failure

cdixon.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#11

Post by keeptrying »

Another way to put it is that, if you move from full-time job to startup, you are going to have to actually create real value (at least value for some large number of people).

At a regular 9-5 job, especially if you havent worked anywhere else before, you can fool yourself into believing that you create value by doing 1-2 hours of work a day (I know lots of people like this).

This is also the reason why people such a huge (harsh) change going from job to startup. You realize you werent really doing that much in your job!

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#13

Post by bdr »

keeptrying wrote: post #11

Another way to put it is that, if you move from full-time job to startup, you are going to have to actually create real value (at least value for some large number of people). At a regular 9-5 job, especially if you havent worked anywhere else before, you can fool yourself into believing that you create value by doing 1-2 hours of work a day (I know lots of people like this). This is also the reason why people such a…

You can create value working 1 to 2 hours at a regular job. After all, if you can create value in eight hours then surely you'll create some in two.

Value isn't just the magnitude of the work you do. It's that multiplied by the importance of the direction you're going in. Companies are good at pointing your work in a direction that's already known to create value. One of the hard parts of a start up is figuring out a new such direction.

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#15

Post by keeptrying »

bdr wrote: post #13
keeptrying wrote: post #11

Another way to put it is that, if you move from full-time job to startup, you are going to have to actually create real value (at least value for some large number of people). At a regular 9-5 job, especially if you havent worked anywhere else before, you can fool yourself into believing that you create value by doing 1-2 hours of work a day (I know lots of people like this). This is also the reason why people such a…

You can create value working 1 to 2 hours at a regular job. After all, if you can create value in eight hours then surely you'll create some in two. Value isn't just the magnitude of the work you do. It's that multiplied by the importance of the direction you're going in. Companies are good at pointing your work in a direction that's already known to create value. One of the hard parts of a start up is figuring out a…

I guess I worded it incorrectly.

In a big company the machine to create value is already present and the company will create value whether you input value or not. If you quit your job, your company will carry on fine.

So essentially your value is small and by definition limited and replaceable (unless your in a small company).

In a startup the magnitude and expanse of value that you create is just so much bigger. You need to create value in different unrelated spaces - creating sales, writing code, hiring etc.

Its like comparing a rocket to a firework or better an engine to one of the cogs in its engine.

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#16

Post by [deleted] »

keeptrying wrote: post #15
bdr wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can create value working 1 to 2 hours at a regular job. After all, if you can create value in eight hours then surely you'll create some in two. Value isn't just the magnitude of the work you do. It's that multiplied by the importance of the direction you're going in. Companies are good at pointing your work in a direction that's already known to create value. One of the hard parts of a start up is figuring out a…

I guess I worded it incorrectly. In a big company the machine to create value is already present and the company will create value whether you input value or not. If you quit your job, your company will carry on fine. So essentially your value is small and by definition limited and replaceable (unless your in a small company). In a startup the magnitude and expanse of value that you create is just so much bigger. You…

[deleted]

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#17

Post by Stratoscope »

Stratoscope wrote: post #9

de·fault [dih-fawlt] noun 1. failure to act; inaction or neglect: They lost their best client by sheer default. 2. failure to meet financial obligations. 3. Law . failure to perform an act or obligation legally required, especially to appear in court or to plead at a time assigned. 4. Sports . failure to arrive in time for, participate in, or complete a scheduled match. 5. lack; want; absence. http://dictionary.refer…

I should have made my purpose in posting that definition more clear, so it wouldn't sounded so much like just a snarky remark.

I had just been thinking about how we use the word "default" so differently in programming from its traditional meaning. In programming, we think of a "default value" or a "default state", and there's really no negative connotation to the word at all.

But in many other parts of life, at least with these traditional meanings, the word "default" has a much more negative meaning. I know I often forget that.

I'm sorry I didn't say something about this instead of just posting the definition.

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#18

Post by chmike »

Startup life expectancy is determined by its financial income (investment not included). This is only loosely linked to the smartness of its members or the energy and effort they put into developping and running the business.

The equation is all about maximizing user interest so that the startup acquires new one, and lowering the barrier to income. Google's business model is a reference example on this.

Regarding the difficulty to induce adoption of a new product, there is a known energy barrier for people to change their habit, even if they know their current habit is not good or optimal. This means the startup needs a strategy to overcome this initial bump. There are many. Once overcome, things get much easier.

One of the strategy is to exploit people's natural tendency to be helpful and the positive perception of generosity (kickstarter). This strategy is used in called calls. Ask for advice or help (beta user program), once in a welcomed helpful and generous mood, they'll more easily open their purse or help spread the word (dropbox).

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#19

Post by b1ind »

nviennot wrote: post #10
Stratoscope wrote: post #9

de·fault [dih-fawlt] noun 1. failure to act; inaction or neglect: They lost their best client by sheer default. 2. failure to meet financial obligations. 3. Law . failure to perform an act or obligation legally required, especially to appear in court or to plead at a time assigned. 4. Sports . failure to arrive in time for, participate in, or complete a scheduled match. 5. lack; want; absence. http://dictionary.refer…

6. Computers. a value that a program or operating system assumes, or a course of action that a program or operating system will take, when the user or programmer specifies no overriding value or action.

It's odd how this is the 6th definition. It seems "default" is used in this context the most, at least recently.

Re: The default state of a startup is failure

#20

Post by winter_blue »

gexla wrote: post #7

"A friend of mine got a job at a big company and was shocked to see his colleagues worked just a few productive hours a day." Depending on what you do, I would say this is natural. I don't care what Henry Ford says (8 hours a day is different for some types of work than it is for others.) I can't go into "super focus" mode for much more than 4 hours per day. I can do my half day of being "wired in" and then take care…

John Carmack has written something about being super-productive in a fixed chunk of time.

But I can see where your coming from. After certain set (~5) of being super-productive, you burn out. And you just can't take it any more.

At these times it is best to take a break and do something different. I've found that these breaks (~1 to 2 hours) tend to make you more productive in your next chunk. (Rather than being burn out and weary.) It gives you time to think and churn ideas for what you will do next.

Lastly I want to add; knowing what you want to do next makes a difference. When you know exactly what you want to do (the spec), you naturally are about implementing it - when not knowing the spec, you're figuring things our as you go and that slows you down. In addition it's always better to sit down and gives additional exclusive time to thinking of your program rather than figuring things out as you go.

Post reply on HN