131–140 of 381 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really wish I'd read this 25 years ago, but probably I wouldn't have believed any of it.
In some way, building absurdly complex systems and watching them fail is a rite of passage.
This is what I constantly tell my students: The hard part about doing a tech product for the most part isn't the what beginners think makes tech hard — the hard part is wrangling systemic complexity in a good, sustainable and reliable way. Many non-tech people e.g. look at programmers and think the hard part is knowing what this garble of weird text means. But this is the easy part. And if you are a person who would…
> the hard part is wrangling systemic complexity in a good, sustainable and reliable way
in an early startup, this thinking is one of the most common ways to failure. people optimise their technology for its scalability, reliability, and "cleanliness", when none of that matters yet. all that matters is finding product market fit
This is dated. There's no rules to founding your own company. As a non-technical founder I can A) Get a technical cofounder which takes me weeks to find, dilutes my ownership, and with whom I have no recourse if their work is sub-par (or we end up just not liking/trusting/vibing with each other) or B) Build an MVP with any number of offshoring partners in a matter of weeks and for far cheaper (money, time, opportunit…
If I hadn't been there, my other founders would have gotten up to their eyeballs in offshore dev debt and would have a giant hairball that even the most experienced tech people would be unable or unwilling to make additional progress against once the offshore team stops delivering.
So, good luck trying to lead an offshore team that's only interested in absorbing as much money from you as possible before moving onto the next sucker. If you don't think a tech cofounder is worth their ask, then you deserve to get exactly what you pay for.
Even this article IMO subtly demonstrates the mindset that leads nontechnical founders to not think they need a technical cofounder, by phrasing the search for one as “recruiting” as if they were a subordinate or code monkey. It should be a partner relationship, not a subordinate relationship. This mindset that technical cofounders are essentially “coders” (a term I hate) is very prevalent among inexperienced nontech…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are many terrible products in this world that were successful only because of good sales and marketing. And vice versa. Name one.
Windows
This is dated. There's no rules to founding your own company. As a non-technical founder I can A) Get a technical cofounder which takes me weeks to find, dilutes my ownership, and with whom I have no recourse if their work is sub-par (or we end up just not liking/trusting/vibing with each other) or B) Build an MVP with any number of offshoring partners in a matter of weeks and for far cheaper (money, time, opportunit…
1. product categories that are technically feasible and profitable and where products already exist;
2. product categories that are technically feasible and profitable and where no products already exist;
3. product categories that are not technically feasible, so no products already exist.
anyone can tell the difference between pile 1 and piles 2 and 3. but you need a technical cofounder to be able to distinguish between pile 2, which is very small, and pile 3, which is enormous. and that's not something you do once; it's an ongoing process that happens at many levels of detail in your product, and even at the largest scale it's a gradual process of reduction of uncertainty, because you don't really know that something is technically possible until it's been done
then, you need to actually build the first product in that category, which involves identifying, prioritizing, and mitigating the risks that could destroy it. probably in banking a lot of this is things like regulators, market moves, and bank runs, but in companies built on software, a lot of those risks are software risks, and you need technical acumen to do this
as a nontechnical cofounder, what value are you bringing to the table? your family's money? invest in a vc fund, or start one, though without technical cofounders you'll waste all your money on companies in pile 3. your business knowledge? that's worthwhile in some cases. your leadership and management skills? likewise. but you're going to have to offer convincing evidence of something like this to be a good option for anyone to invest their money in
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are many terrible products in this world that were successful only because of good sales and marketing. And vice versa. Name one.
Tesla cars
The Model 3 and its variants I think are meh from a UX POV (stupid centre iPad distracto-slab etc) and I won't pay for them because of who is behind them... and the lies about full self driving, and the crap support etc... suck.... but I think it's disingenuous to call Tesla product crap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely true. Of course, a non-technical cofounder probably knows more than just marketing. He may add a lot of value in terms of fundraising, product management, and other areas. Teaching all of these things to an engineer wouldn't be trivial.
Nonetheless, I think most business functions are more societally established, and for that reason they can be more easily outsourced. You can find a "pre-packaged" MBA, attorney, etc. because society is very good at churning out those roles. Just go the most recently graduated Wharton batch and hire the top grad for $300k, and you have someone who can do your legal, fundraising, operations, etc. It's much harder to f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are many terrible products in this world that were successful only because of good sales and marketing. And vice versa. Name one.
Religion.
There is a place for religion. Something that pushes you to be better than you are. Along with the happiness and fulfillment that comes from that effort. Selflessness, love, compassion, truth.
Plenty of bad religions telling you that you are perfect the way that you are. Just give me money, fame, or influence and I will flatter you and pump your ego.
Another form of this is flattery in exchange for hating something. Many doomsday cults fit this category. All your life problems are because of 'insert target X'. But I, I have the answers you need.
Religion is more attuned with purpose, where your heart is, than the belief in God. Though the two are often paired.
And yes, we crave purpose.
This is dated. There's no rules to founding your own company. As a non-technical founder I can A) Get a technical cofounder which takes me weeks to find, dilutes my ownership, and with whom I have no recourse if their work is sub-par (or we end up just not liking/trusting/vibing with each other) or B) Build an MVP with any number of offshoring partners in a matter of weeks and for far cheaper (money, time, opportunit…
Heh, good luck. As a tech cofounder, I attempted to do just this and I have extensive development and management experience. It was a nightmare, EVERY SINGLE offshoring company tried to play us as a group that didn't know their stuff, and when put to the iron they couldn't produce anything that would stand up--technically--against a mild sneeze. If I hadn't been there, my other founders would have gotten up to their…