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

Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

ianbetteridge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 235 posts

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#131

Post by rpgbr »

imiric wrote: post #121
j4coh wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s selling out. Trading in your idealism to work on spyware/ad tech or whatever.

Oh, please. "Selling out" is such an immature take. Andreessen was one of the first people who saw the potential of the web in the early days, worked on the first graphical web browsers and built a highly influential business around it. Then he went on to create one of the most powerful VC firms in the industry, which in turn funded some of the most successful companies. His impact wouldn't have been anywhere near wh…

>Then he went on to create one of the most powerful VC firms in the industry, which in turn funded some of the most successful companies.

Funding crypto nonsense, “apocalyptical” AI, and questionable politics. Meanwhile, writing “manifestos” that complain people don't recognize how great he and their peers are. I mean, thanks for Netscape and all, but Andreessen is as bad as the rotting VC culture can get.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#132

Post by faggotbreath »

lazide wrote: post #94
scandox wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It must change a lot...when was being charming ever an offense?

It depends on the crowd. Being charming to old school Germans means you’re a scam artist/unauthentic. Most ‘greatest generation’ folks (if they’re still alive) had a similar feeling/overtone. Because it’s true - someone being charming is making themselves likable to be liked (selling themselves), instead of letting their warts show. Because at a minimum they want your company. And it often works. Someone being grumpy…

[flagged]

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#133

Post by bjornsing »

ozozozd wrote: post #118
bjornsing wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a really good line and I’d love to read a blog post that distills to it. But this ain’t it. I bet a young Woz today would be a hell of a lot better off in Graham’s world than in this guy’s “big companies are great” world.

I read the post till the end. It never mentioned big companies being good or great. Can you quote the part?

Typically when someone stresses how somebody doesn’t have certain experience it’s because they themselves have that experience and value it highly.

In this case the OP stresses Graham’s lack of experience working for big companies.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#134

Post by rglullis »

Animats wrote: post #24

The part of "tech" which is ad-driven has become both boring and seriously annoying. Unfortunately, that's where the money is. There are interesting things going on: * Self-driving cars finally work. San Francisco is full of them. Next step is to get the cost down and replace those rotating scanners with something cheaper. At least the ones that aren't on top. * Robotic manipulation in unstructured situations is just…

Except of AIDS, none of the items on your list are things we really need but just a naive attempt of masking the problems of modern society life.

Worse still: most of these problems were caused by the psychopaths who wanted nothing but money and power and found in the "techno-optimism" the perfect excuse to justify their actions.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#135

Post by JumpCrisscross »

rglullis wrote: post #134
Animats wrote: post #24

The part of "tech" which is ad-driven has become both boring and seriously annoying. Unfortunately, that's where the money is. There are interesting things going on: * Self-driving cars finally work. San Francisco is full of them. Next step is to get the cost down and replace those rotating scanners with something cheaper. At least the ones that aren't on top. * Robotic manipulation in unstructured situations is just…

Except of AIDS, none of the items on your list are things we really need but just a naive attempt of masking the problems of modern society life. Worse still: most of these problems were caused by the psychopaths who wanted nothing but money and power and found in the "techno-optimism" the perfect excuse to justify their actions.

> none of the items on your list are things we really need

This can be said about practically any technology outside agriculture. It’s wild to pretend the items on that list don’t increase quality of life.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#136

Post by imiric »

rpgbr wrote: post #131
imiric wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, please. "Selling out" is such an immature take. Andreessen was one of the first people who saw the potential of the web in the early days, worked on the first graphical web browsers and built a highly influential business around it. Then he went on to create one of the most powerful VC firms in the industry, which in turn funded some of the most successful companies. His impact wouldn't have been anywhere near wh…

>Then he went on to create one of the most powerful VC firms in the industry, which in turn funded some of the most successful companies. Funding crypto nonsense, “apocalyptical” AI, and questionable politics. Meanwhile, writing “manifestos” that complain people don't recognize how great he and their peers are. I mean, thanks for Netscape and all, but Andreessen is as bad as the rotting VC culture can get.

So you only approve of VCs that fund companies you like? Or do you disapprove of the VC culture in general?

It's kind of ironic we're discussing this here, considering YC is following the same model, and has made similar investments. And yet both firms have also funded many companies outside of the sectors you dislike. Invoking ad hominems doesn't change the impact that both YC and a16z have had on the industry.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#138

Post by lazide »

faggotbreath wrote: post #132
lazide wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the crowd. Being charming to old school Germans means you’re a scam artist/unauthentic. Most ‘greatest generation’ folks (if they’re still alive) had a similar feeling/overtone. Because it’s true - someone being charming is making themselves likable to be liked (selling themselves), instead of letting their warts show. Because at a minimum they want your company. And it often works. Someone being grumpy…

[flagged]

None of the people I’m noting are even aware of HN’s existence

It’s what happens when scammers run amok (like now) and they are the ones that have to clean up the mess.

We’ll get another generation like that soon.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#139

Post by langsoul-com »

Let's not forget that people themselves changed and what is popular. Look at any top show hn post and you'll see all this talk about the market fit, the competitors, and how much money that product can make.

The hackers have disappeared and we're apart of the prohlem.

Should really have a tag rule to prevent any boring business start up bogus discussions when the poster wants.

Re: Founder Mode, hackers, and being bored by tech

#140

Post by rglullis »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #135
rglullis wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except of AIDS, none of the items on your list are things we really need but just a naive attempt of masking the problems of modern society life. Worse still: most of these problems were caused by the psychopaths who wanted nothing but money and power and found in the "techno-optimism" the perfect excuse to justify their actions.

> none of the items on your list are things we really need This can be said about practically any technology outside agriculture. It’s wild to pretend the items on that list don’t increase quality of life.

The problem is not of technology. The problem is that we are working to apply technology solutions with no regard to the scale and trade-offs involved.

- Automation is good. Striving for "100% robotic warehouses" is a recipe to further concentrate wealth around the handful of corporations that can deploy it.

- Electric engines are good. Thinking that we would be better off by giving one car to every adult person instead of simply redesigning the overall transit network is a horrible idea.

- Finding new sources for rare earths is good. Jumping to the conclusion that this means we can then extract them is absurdly naive. We don't even recycle plastic properly, what do you think is going to happen with all those metals in the failing car batteries 20 years from now?

- Improved drones are good. Arguing that progress is "getting VIPs out of congested areas" is absolutely dystopian.

- Having drugs to treat diabetes is good. But having these drugs under the control of pharma corporations who worry more about their bottom line than actual health of the population is outright cruel.

I am all for developing technology. I am not a Luddite. But we got to ask ourselves "cui buono?". Whenever we see somebody pushing some technology or project to solve "humanity problems", the immediate check should be "if this problem is so important to solve, would you still work on it even if you gained nothing from it?"

Post reply on HN