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

Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

jwz.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 313 posts

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#211

Post by tealtan »

rapind wrote: post #209
antirez wrote: post #168

Humans are not designed to: 1) Stay long hours sitted, immobile. It ruins your health. 2) To provide a steady high quality output in creative disciplines (writing code qualifies) for more than a 4/5 hours a day (add to this the time to do breaks, install your updates, check news sites, fix the email client, and you'll reach the 7/8 hours per day figure). It makes sense in a startup to work hard in crucial weeks, you…

I respect your opinion Antirez, but I hear so much speculation about work habits that I have to ask you: Is this your opinion / experience, or is it based on some specific research / study you can point to? As a fellow developer I'd love this to be true, however a meme / fad started during my working career in rich cultures stating that hard work isn't rewarding or is unnecessary. I question this. My father taught me…

Nothing wrong with working hard. But do it for yourself. Don't do it because a VC tells you to. Don't do it because the owner of a publication that thrives off of startup news tells you to.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#212

Post by wpietri »

1010100101 wrote: post #75
dschobel wrote: post #55

I love that this is the top story on HN. I only wish that PG got as much flack for his startup economics hype piece[1] and proposition to compress a lifetime's worth of work effort into four years. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html

Agreed. Another one who should get some flack is Thiel. He may just be the worst, suggesting kids should forgo a university education and going so far as to actually debate the "issue" whether an education is "worth it". For some of these VC to make money, they have no need to see university degrees. But they have their own interests in mind. And, lo and behold, most of them have university degrees.

I haven't heard his whole pitch, but the summary version I've heard doesn't seem crazy to me.

There are some fields where what really matters is talent and practical experience, not book learning. A lot of the best techies I know either have no degree or have it in something unrelated. The same is true of entrepreneurs and musicians, and probably other fields.

Consider also the absurdly rising cost of education:

"Median household income has grown by a factor of 6.5 in the past 40 years, but the cost of attending a state college has increased by a factor of 15 for in-state students and 24 for out-of-state students. The cost of attending a private college has increased by a factor of more than 13." -- http://www.economist.com/node/16960438

It's simple economics that if the cost of a good keeps increasing, it eventually won't be worth it for some purposes. It's not crazy to ask whether for certain people it's really worth it now. If your aim is entrepreneurship, you might be better off spending $150k and 4 years on starting businesses and learning on your own rather than giving that to Harvard.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#213

Post by scott_s »

rapind wrote: post #209
antirez wrote: post #168

Humans are not designed to: 1) Stay long hours sitted, immobile. It ruins your health. 2) To provide a steady high quality output in creative disciplines (writing code qualifies) for more than a 4/5 hours a day (add to this the time to do breaks, install your updates, check news sites, fix the email client, and you'll reach the 7/8 hours per day figure). It makes sense in a startup to work hard in crucial weeks, you…

I respect your opinion Antirez, but I hear so much speculation about work habits that I have to ask you: Is this your opinion / experience, or is it based on some specific research / study you can point to? As a fellow developer I'd love this to be true, however a meme / fad started during my working career in rich cultures stating that hard work isn't rewarding or is unnecessary. I question this. My father taught me…

I think you're confusing "hard work" with "working with reckless abandon."

I find I am most consistently productive if I work 8 - 10 hours on the weekdays, and 3 - 5 hours on the weekends. I can sustain this for several months without burnout, despite the fact that I work every day. This is more than an average work-week, but it's also not the crazyness of deadline crunch-times. It leaves enough time for workouts and some socializing. Eventually, though I need a few months where I take at least one day off during the weekends.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#214

Post by chollida1 »

Retric wrote: post #179
chalst wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. One has to factor into the assets that Microsoft had at the start the access to Bill Gates' dad, who was a highly successful lawyer active in technology. Where would Microsoft's shrinkwrap sales strategy have been without legal advice?

His mother served on the same board of directors as the IBM CEO. Which is probably why the original licensing deal was even considered and why the they where not heavy handed in their contract negotiation. Edit: In 1980, she discussed with John Opel, a fellow committee member who was the chairman of the International Business Machines Corporation," her son's company. "Mr. Opel, by some accounts, mentioned Mrs. Gates…

> His mother served on the same board of directors as the IBM CEO. Which is probably why the original licensing deal was even considered and why the they where not heavy handed in their contract negotiation

The first is probably true, I agree atleast. Your second point about them not being heavy handed because they knew Bill's mother I just can't see having any shred of truth.

IBM also made a sweetheart deal with Intel with no mother's involved.

The reason they made those deals has been stated many times over.

IBM was in a huge rush to ship and they needed an OS and CPU in a very bad way. They made those deals because that's what allowed them to ship.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#215

Post by [deleted] »

rapind wrote: post #209
antirez wrote: post #168

Humans are not designed to: 1) Stay long hours sitted, immobile. It ruins your health. 2) To provide a steady high quality output in creative disciplines (writing code qualifies) for more than a 4/5 hours a day (add to this the time to do breaks, install your updates, check news sites, fix the email client, and you'll reach the 7/8 hours per day figure). It makes sense in a startup to work hard in crucial weeks, you…

I respect your opinion Antirez, but I hear so much speculation about work habits that I have to ask you: Is this your opinion / experience, or is it based on some specific research / study you can point to? As a fellow developer I'd love this to be true, however a meme / fad started during my working career in rich cultures stating that hard work isn't rewarding or is unnecessary. I question this. My father taught me…

[deleted]

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#216

Post by zecho »

bh42222 wrote: post #199
dgalling wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt writers can work the same way. Anyone doing any type of creative work needs these types of breaks. Similarly, one article published without adequate editing/fact-checking can do wonders to destroy the credibility of a blog...

Similarly, one article published without adequate editing/fact-checking can do wonders to destroy the credibility of a blog... Try reading an article on anything you are an expert in, from any newspaper.

To be fair, newspapers aren't written for experts. That doesn't excuse a lot of crap from newspapers, but they're writing for an audience that isn't necessarily well-versed in all the subjects, for better or worse.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#217

Post by wpietri »

corin_ wrote: post #136
felipemnoa wrote: post #8

>>Follow the fucking money. When a VC tells you what's good for you, check your wallet, then count your fingers. This is just gold.

It struck me more as simple than gold. If a VC that invested in a company gives them advice then obviously his goal is to make more money... but that goal will, in turn make you more money too. If you don't like the fact that a VC has the potential to make more money than you, the solution is to not take investment from one, not to ignore them after they take investment. Also remember that yes, they're not putting in…

Sigh.

First, the goal of entrepreneurs is not just to make money. Unlike most VCs and all of their LPs.

Interests of VCs and entrepreneurs differ in a number of other ways. A key one being that VCs have a whole portfolio and are hits-driven, while entrepreneurs have exactly one company. That means VCs have an incentive to push for giant hits, even at with an increased risk of failure. That makes VCs more money, but means you're much more likely to be, e.g., that guy who had to shut down everything because you expanded too fast.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#219

Post by khafra »

zecho wrote: post #216
bh42222 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly, one article published without adequate editing/fact-checking can do wonders to destroy the credibility of a blog... Try reading an article on anything you are an expert in, from any newspaper.

To be fair, newspapers aren't written for experts. That doesn't excuse a lot of crap from newspapers, but they're writing for an audience that isn't necessarily well-versed in all the subjects, for better or worse.

The point isn't that they should pander to experts. The point is that they're wrong more often than they're right; seriously, factually, inarguably incorrect.

Re: Watch a VC use my name to sell a con

#220

Post by larrys »

nostrademons wrote: post #116
larrys wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Almost every industry out there manages to make good profits without their employees having to give up their lives." Medicine and law being two exceptions.

Note the pattern: medicine, law, and engineering are 3 industries where the employees carry significant human capital with them (finance is another one, and i-bankers also give up their lives). I suspect the reason for this is because human capital makes the payoff for additional hours worked non-linear. One cashier working 80 hours a week should be just about as productive as two cashiers working 40 hours a week (a…

"one engineer working 80 hours a week is significantly more productive than two engineers working 40 hours a week"

Similar in medicine doctors (hospitalists in particular) will work 12 hour shifts because of "continuity of care" which is better for the patient - to not be passed between two doctors.

Post reply on HN