Live data from Hacker News

YC: Requests for Startups

ycombinator.com

221–230 of 582 posts

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#221
Most of those take a lot more time and money than YC usually offers.

There are some opportunities in "New Defense Technology". Something like a low-cost replacement for the Javelin anti-tank missile based on off the shelf phone camera parts ought to be possible. Of course, once that's out there, every insurgent group will have some.

"Explainable AI" is really important.

"Stablecoin finance" is mostly how to make sure the issuers don't steal the collateral. Maybe the people behind the stablecoin have an explosive collar welded around their neck. If the price drops, it detonates. That might work.

"Applying machine learning to robotics" has potential. Get bin-picking nailed and get acquired by Amazon. Many people have failed at this, but it might be possible now.

"Bring manufacturing back to America". Is it possible to build a cell phone in the US?

"Climate tech" - think automating HVAC and insulation selection, installation, and analysis. Installers suck at this. See previous HVAC article on HN. A phone app where you walk around and through the building with an IR camera is one place to start. Map the duct system. Take manometer readings. Crunch. That's do-able on YC-sized money.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#222
Some of these are not like the others.

Also some are way more achievable by software-type engineer-types and the financial associates in their ecosystem, due to extreme familiarity with that particular landscape. Some also require a little more commitment than starting a small software company.

If I was going to split the combined vision into only two categories it would be like this:

  -  Applying machine learning to robotics
    
  -  New defense technology
    
  -  Bring manufacturing back to America
    
  -  New space companies
    
  -  Climate tech
    
  -  A way to end cancer
    
  -  Foundation models for biological systems
    
and then the less moonshotty efforts:

  -  Using machine learning to simulate the physical world
    
  -  Commercial open source companies

  -  Spatial computing

  -  New enterprise resource planning software (ERPs)
    
  -  Developer tools inspired by existing internal tools
    
  -  Explainable AI
    
  -  LLMs for manual back office processes in legacy enterprises
    
  -  AI to build enterprise software
    
  -  Stablecoin finance

  -  The managed service organization model for healthcare
    
  -  Eliminating middlemen in healthcare
    
  -  Better enterprise glue
    
  -  Small fine-tuned models as an alternative to giant generic ones
Interestingly, #1 rose to the top of my list well over 40 years ago when I had a chance to do a little machine learning to guide automated systems. Was very lucky to have such powerful advanced equipment under my complete control in the laboratory at such an early time. Needed custom gear to bump it to the next level though. Figured all kinds of people would be doing things like that once "personal" computers were no longer a rare curiosity.

The remaining things in the first group are some other things I (and I'm sure many others) have had in mind since before personal computers became accessible.

"Too bad" my ambition has grown with age and it would take about a $10 million company to build my prototype hardware, and that's before any deployable machine learning can commence.

So it's been an interesting 43 years keeping in mind how I would apply automation and machine learning to almost everything all the time, and refining my intended approach for a greater number of decades the earlier I had the idea.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#223
Cool list! I hope yc will also fund creative consumer companies. Ways to have fun, enjoy life, build healthy habits, cherish memories, dream about the future, and deepen relationships with friends. This is 100% selfish - I want more fun and meaningful products to use.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#224
I submitted an application for w24 that fits in the "Developer tools inspired by existing internal tools" category but wasn't accepted. I suspect my pitch probably needed work, and I also haven't started building at all yet and submitted as a solo-founder which it seems has less chance of being accepted.

Here's the pitch and some details, in case anyone else is interested in the idea:

> Supportal uses AI to generate internal tooling for startups that enables founders to scale customer-support without having to rely on engineering resources.

> Given some simple input context like tech-stack and a database schema, Supportal uses AI to auto-generate internal tools which allow customer-support to easily answer questions about and take action on customer-data without needing help from an engineer.

> Supportal offers founders a fully-featured self or cloud-hosted web UI.

Retool (https://retool.com), Zapier (https://zapier.com), Airtable (https://www.airtable.com), Superblocks (https://www.superblocks.com), and Google AppSheet (https://about.appsheet.com) would likely be primary competitors, although their products require heavy user interaction to build internal tools either through composition in a WYSIWYG editor, low/no-code solutions, or integrations expertise using a full programming language.

Although I'm no longer there, we actually evaluated and/or used all of these tools at Pulley, so I've had first-hand experience with their friction and where the gaps exist that Supportal would fill.

These tools are also all targeted at integrations-experts who have the technical knowledge to write code and spend time building the tool they want.

Supportal aims to generate the tooling you need intelligently via AI introspection and get you up and running with useful command and query tools to help your customer-support team take action and gain insights without help from engineering right out of the box.

My most recent experience comes building internal tools for Pulley; I built the initial version of the internal tools in ~3 weeks and added features to it within Pulley over ~2 years. Roughly ~2-3 months of full-time work spread over that time period.

Features were added as we identified gaps in our support agents ability to answer questions and take action, which often required dedicated engineering resources to help with, leading to a productivity loss for both groups.

That said, I haven't actually built out anything that would _generate_ tools like this yet, but I've done enough adjacent work in the codegen/AI space in the last couple years that I feel confident I could put the pieces together.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#226

For the AR/VR space, I'm curious about YCs thinking about the addressable market and the possibility to have a unicorn-scale company developing solely for VR/AR in the foreseeable future (that isn't a device manufacturer). The devices seem to be getting better and better, but the software seems rather lacking (currently typing this from a gorgeous giant display on my Vision Pro, which I use mostly exactly like how I…

Hi there, I wrote this RFP. We like to back strong technical founders, and some may be interested in working in AR/VR like I did years ago. You are right that the software is lacking which is more of an opportunity. Wrt with the market, yes, it is still very nascent, so founders working on this space have to be be very excited and inherently believe in it in the long run.

Technical founder in the VR/AR space here. Not in a rush so have discounted YC in the past, still may be worth a short chat. Use the "Apply" link on the RFS page?

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#227
post #80

One interesting thing about this is that this what investors want you to make for them to invest in, not necessarily what you want to make. Investors are very happy with moonshots (1% chance of you succeeding, but 10,000x return if you do). But I don't think any rational founder should be. Not all of these are moonshots, but some of them are (e.g. securing defense contracts seems lower risk). Also I imagine getting t…

I don't know how other investors operate but if YC sees a good founder working on something they don't care about, just because they think investors want them to work on it, they'd almost certainly tell them to switch to something they do care about.

pg's most frequent advice to founders about ideas is to ask themselves what they themselves wish would exist, then make that—i.e. solve a problem you yourself have. Another thing he and Jessica say a lot is that you need to be passionate about what you're working on in order to make it through the arduous haul of a startup.

That's even more true of the 'moonshot' startups, since they're harder and take longer. If you look at the hardest startups YC has invested in, you won't find many founders who aren't personally obsessed with what they're working on, and have been for many years. That's one of the things YC would be looking for before funding somebody to work on such things.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#228

Some cool ideas here, but Garry Tan really can't be leading this organization after his death threats at elected officials.

If you believe that these elected officials have facilitated the deaths of 100s of people and the suffering of many more then... (btw I think they pretty much have fueled the drug and lawlessness epidemic in SF)

Ironically, people like Garry have actually fueled said epidemic, by contributing to ever-rising inequality, driving people to the streets, where they turn to crime and drugs.

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#229

Anybody interested in talking to a potential customer for: * Developer tools inspired by existing internal tools * LLMs for manual back office processes in legacy enterprises Feel free to message me. Having worked in-house for the last 15 years, I've seen a variety of these, have built more than a few of them myself, and am in the middle of building some new ones using LLMs right now — all within large enterprise leg…

Would love to talk about the back-office processes. Let's connect via sam@instance.co.jp

Re: YC: Requests for Startups

#230

I find it strange that they would write "The hollowing out of US manufacturing has led to social and political division and left us in a precarious place geopolitically." And then suggest the answer to that is robotics and ML, which does nothing but exacerbate the social and political divisions - unless government and enterprise make the hard choices to provide a real safety net. And then, if we do that, it doesn't m…

There are two factors to consider though. On the one hand, you're correct that it does nothing for the American worker to bring manufacturing back if it means huge buildings with skeleton crews and machines that effectively run themselves. I don't particularly have a solution for this. Americans have gotten used to the price of goods being artificially low because of inexpensive labor in impoverished countries. Unles…

> it does nothing for the American worker to bring manufacturing back if it means huge buildings with skeleton crews and machines that effectively run themselves

I don't think that right. It still means goods are being produced in America, which means:

1. Greater security of production against geopolitical threats, and

2. More goods being produced overall, meaning cheaper goods.

Even without significant employment, those are good things!

Post reply on HN