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

Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 194 posts

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#121

Post by dvt »

Retric wrote: post #112
dvt wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking at upsides on their own is meaningless. Which is why I've been mentioning "risks" in just about every post I've made. Which is why a big part of OP is how taxing and difficult it's been. Why is why we keep talking about how 9/10 businesses fail. There's no free lunch. But my original point was that we already know this . So it's not particularly insightful to point it out on a forum almost exclusively dedic…

“can be risky (see OP)” is vastly downplaying 1 in 10 odds of nominal success. Simply not failing doesn’t mean the bet paid off.

> “can be risky (see OP)” is vastly downplaying 1 in 10 odds of nominal success. Simply not failing doesn’t mean the bet paid off.

We know this, yadda yadda "survivorship bias." It's just boring to have the same people making the same points about every startup that made it. It's like the old "correlation does not equal causation" trope you see repeated over and over again when someone links any dataset. We get it.

Again, my point is that this is not insightful -- and you've yet to demonstrate otherwise.

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#122

Post by dvt »

baby wrote: post #97
dvt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I can't help but think about the 9 founders of other companies that had the same resolve in the same situation, but things did not work out so well. Everyone on HN knows that the startup life is, in many ways, a lottery. But that doesn't mean it's not still one of the most reliable ways of exercising self-determination, working on something you're truly passionate about, taking full responsibility for your fate…

Point of GP is that failing while hitting unexpected medical issues in the US will destroy your life with high probability. There is no prize for those who lost, just a feel-good stories for those like OP who “survived”.

This kind of mentality reminds me of solipsism. It's just not interesting to talk about, insightful, or productive, outside of being a contrarian edge-case you could write a paper about.

Cool, you're a cynic. Yes, as we all know, most startups fail and the US healthcare system sucks. Anything else to add?

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#123

Post by baby »

dvt wrote: post #122
baby wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point of GP is that failing while hitting unexpected medical issues in the US will destroy your life with high probability. There is no prize for those who lost, just a feel-good stories for those like OP who “survived”.

This kind of mentality reminds me of solipsism. It's just not interesting to talk about, insightful, or productive, outside of being a contrarian edge-case you could write a paper about. Cool, you're a cynic. Yes, as we all know, most startups fail and the US healthcare system sucks. Anything else to add?

I'm not sure why you're having such a virulent reaction to my comment? That's probably the most important point about this whole thread, at least this is what I got from the post. If you want to feel good and feel empowered to build your own start up from OP's post, then I don't know what to think of your risk appetite.

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#124

Post by nojito »

capiki wrote: post #108
nojito wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think this is why a lot of crazy big startups come from younger people, they can afford to go for broke before they have a family and other obligations, because the worst that can happen is they are left with nothing, then they settle for a high-paying job at a big tech company and 2 months later they can afford a new car. This really isn't true. The average age of a successful entrepreneur is 45.

That's a *successful* entrepreneur. OP was talking about any entrepreneur.

No...

>I think this is why a lot of crazy big startups come from younger people,

"crazy big startups"

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#125

Post by notatrumper »

deedub wrote: post #119
notatrumper wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they bought Bitcoin for 1$ in 2009. Another tried and proven way is to marry somebody who is rich. Mostly just an option for women, though.

You have repeatedly brought up marrying someone rich in this thread saying it is "mostly an option for women". So, are you some how saying rich women only marry rich men, but rich men will consider poor women? So much so it's actually a thing? Sources, please? It sounds extremely out dated and kind of gross...especially because you keep saying it like it is some valid thing.

It's a well known data point. In general, women don't like to marry down, and men have less of an issue marrying down. Think of the classic "doctor marries nurse".

If you Google, you should find a lot of articles about it, as it is an important sociological issue. Now that more women are having a career, in fact, more women than men are having an academic career, it is becoming difficult for women to find adequate men.

Also women marrying up was historically the MOST important mechanism of social mobility (people moving up in status/wealth). Too bad that feminism does not allow it anymore, as any man who marries a less wealthy women is considered to be "abusing his power".

The other claim, women being attracted to men with more money, I am less sure about. I am sure you can find studies analyzing data from dating platforms yielding that result, but I don't know how well they generalize to dating in general.

Edit: perhaps a starting point, but in general, Google should be able to help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#126

Post by ZephyrBlu »

dvt wrote: post #30

Congratulations! The Webflow co-founders personify the perfect combination of persistence, grit, and a bit of luck. I know nay-sayers will start parroting "survivorship bias," but these kinds of stories motivate me :) Cheers, and thanks for the inspiring words!

Survivorship bias isn't a negative, it's just a fact.

People bringing it up aren't naysayers, they're just being realistic.

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#127

Post by notatrumper »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #79
notatrumper wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they bought Bitcoin for 1$ in 2009. Another tried and proven way is to marry somebody who is rich. Mostly just an option for women, though.

People who bought Bitcoin for $1 in 2009 won the lottery. There was no rational basis for expecting any significant payout from that. Marrying into money is an option for some, but you have to make a big emotional sacrifice (at least in Western culture) if you opt for going by wallet instead of going by heart. It's doable, but GP's point here is that a rich person doesn't have to make that choice .

Why would it be a big emotional sacrifice to marry into money? Especially if (as some studies suggest) money is a big part of what makes men attractive, odds should be high for actual love being involved in the decision.

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#128

Post by baby »

deedub wrote: post #119
notatrumper wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they bought Bitcoin for 1$ in 2009. Another tried and proven way is to marry somebody who is rich. Mostly just an option for women, though.

You have repeatedly brought up marrying someone rich in this thread saying it is "mostly an option for women". So, are you some how saying rich women only marry rich men, but rich men will consider poor women? So much so it's actually a thing? Sources, please? It sounds extremely out dated and kind of gross...especially because you keep saying it like it is some valid thing.

It's definitely a thing in places like China where you have a much larger population of men, and it is harder and harder to find a woman (so much that some people buy their wives online from other poorer countries).

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#129

Post by dvt »

baby wrote: post #123
dvt wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of mentality reminds me of solipsism. It's just not interesting to talk about, insightful, or productive, outside of being a contrarian edge-case you could write a paper about. Cool, you're a cynic. Yes, as we all know, most startups fail and the US healthcare system sucks. Anything else to add?

I'm not sure why you're having such a virulent reaction to my comment? That's probably the most important point about this whole thread, at least this is what I got from the post. If you want to feel good and feel empowered to build your own start up from OP's post, then I don't know what to think of your risk appetite.

> If you want to feel good and feel empowered to build your own start up from OP's post, then I don't know what to think of your risk appetite.

You're attacking a strawman here. My point was merely that cynicism (which your post conveyed in spades), much like solipsism, is an unproductive dead-end. Feel free to make your case, but I'm fairly confident I'm correct.

Re: Thanks HN: You helped save a company that now helps thousands make a living

#130

Post by dvt »

scrozier wrote: post #93
dvt wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was specifically talking about founders (but even early stage engineers can do extremely well if the startup takes off). The upside is much higher doing your own thing rather than working at BigCorp (the two aren't even remotely comparable, but neither is the risk). Not to mention the end goals/QOL of working on what you want, commanding your own ship, being financially independent, etc. Virtually all self-made mil…

You're making a giant logic error. It may well be true that most self-made millionaires started a company. It is certainly not true that most people who start companies become self-made millionaires, which was the premise of your original post.

> ...most people who start companies become self-made millionaires, which was the premise of your original post.

This is a complete fabrication. I never said that, directly or indirectly. In fact, I've said multiple times in this thread that 9/10 startups fail and that startup life is a "lottery" but people still choose to do it for reasons X, Y, or Z.

Post reply on HN