261–270 of 681 posts
Ok, so I am having a hard time buying the idea that just make a fun project if you want to create a something like 'Google'. Startup 101 teaches us that you need to solve a painful problem that lot of people have, that is the best way to create 'Google', so isn't the advise contradictory?
> If you look at the lists of the richest people that occasionally get published in the press, nearly all of them did it by starting their own companies. Actaally if you look at those lists, the largest number made it by choosing their parents correctly.
I guess luck plays a big role in one's success. That said, pg's points still hold, as he is telling us how to maximize our chance of success despite of what we are born with.
Totally insane. 99% or more of the people who enable Google to do what Google does are employees of Google. Same with every other company. The odds of being the founder of a successful company are probably worse than being a professional sportsball player (if only because they turn over more frequently). Does anything good come from encouraging kids to think that they will manage to sail through life as a successful…
Startups are high-risk high-reward. That doesn't necessarily mean they're a bad idea. Expected value can be positive even when probability is low. Moreover, a lot of young people can afford to take a chance on something. If you spend a few years living with your parents and attempting to create something, and you fail, you still have several decades of your life to go punch a clock at Big Corp. And even if you fail t…
In SV, if you’re a founder then it’s medium-risk, high-reward. You’ll be propped up by investor funding, have acquihire>exec as escape route, and in the slim chance of actual success you’ll range from rich to mega-rich.
For non-founders (employees) it’s high-risk medium-reward. An acquihire will make you a rank-and-file employee, and if the startup is a true success you might still only bag a moderate sum, thanks to your tiny sub-percent of equity. Only huge IPOs bring wealth to non-founders.
Totally insane. 99% or more of the people who enable Google to do what Google does are employees of Google. Same with every other company. The odds of being the founder of a successful company are probably worse than being a professional sportsball player (if only because they turn over more frequently). Does anything good come from encouraging kids to think that they will manage to sail through life as a successful…
Totally insane. 99% or more of the people who enable Google to do what Google does are employees of Google. Same with every other company. The odds of being the founder of a successful company are probably worse than being a professional sportsball player (if only because they turn over more frequently). Does anything good come from encouraging kids to think that they will manage to sail through life as a successful…
Startups are high-risk high-reward. That doesn't necessarily mean they're a bad idea. Expected value can be positive even when probability is low. Moreover, a lot of young people can afford to take a chance on something. If you spend a few years living with your parents and attempting to create something, and you fail, you still have several decades of your life to go punch a clock at Big Corp. And even if you fail t…
PG is remarkably consistent in his advice; much of his writing is about developing a nose for "what's missing" and having the chops and resources to attempt a solution. Also, I think 'Google' in this instance is more for motivation rather than a literal comparison. He's leaving out the part that Google was founded by graduate CS students a) looking for a thesis, b) into node-link graphs, and c) inspired by academic c…
This is what is fundamentally missing from most talk about "tech" startups by VC types these days. They're not actually interested in the nerdy stuff, just in the "disruption" stuff. L&S were , and they hired other people who were. They didn't start with a business idea, but with a technical one. They filled in the blanks on the business side after they survived the .com crash. I didn't get to Google until 2011, but…
> If you look at the lists of the richest people that occasionally get published in the press, nearly all of them did it by starting their own companies. Actaally if you look at those lists, the largest number made it by choosing their parents correctly.
> If you look at the lists of the richest people that occasionally get published in the press, nearly all of them did it by starting their own companies. And actually it's a stupid point to begin with; making a point by choosing the absolute top percentage as if there is nothing other than 'really' rich (forget whether that is even a good thing I'd argue it's not a plus to have that much money and notoriety). There i…
Totally insane. 99% or more of the people who enable Google to do what Google does are employees of Google. Same with every other company. The odds of being the founder of a successful company are probably worse than being a professional sportsball player (if only because they turn over more frequently). Does anything good come from encouraging kids to think that they will manage to sail through life as a successful…
This is a very strange comment to make on the Y combinator link sharing site. A site started as a space for a community of founders and aspiring founders to share their inspiration, ideas and stories. And you're responding to an article written by the founder of that community.
> If you look at the lists of the richest people that occasionally get published in the press, nearly all of them did it by starting their own companies. Actaally if you look at those lists, the largest number made it by choosing their parents correctly.
Certainly a few, but a quick scan of lists makes it look more like 25% inherited in the top 20 or so
Totally insane. 99% or more of the people who enable Google to do what Google does are employees of Google. Same with every other company. The odds of being the founder of a successful company are probably worse than being a professional sportsball player (if only because they turn over more frequently). Does anything good come from encouraging kids to think that they will manage to sail through life as a successful…
Depends on the size of company. A small company maybe is more probable than being a top athlete.