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

Grow the Puzzle Around You

foundersatwork.posthaven.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#31

Post by strken »

backpropaganda wrote: post #28
jasode wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People who say soft skills are dead Are you sure people actually say that? This struck me as odd because it seems to be the total opposite of what people say. It seems virtually everyone stresses "soft skills" repeatedly. But I have no proof of this so I just did a quick search of Google's 130 trillion pages to try and get a sense if people out there are really saying that soft skills are useless: "soft skills are d…

"soft skills are dead" is not expressed that way. It's expressed as "the cofounders should be tech", and other such advice which emphasizes the technical capabilities of the cofounders and early hires, and to not trust "suits". Not taking a side here, but just saying that the valley does tend to emphasize a lot on tech over other aspects of running a business.

It gets a bit complicated when the soft skill in question is dealing with technical people and making sure they're as productive as possible, because this has historically been an area where non-technical managers struggle.

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#32

Post by iamwil »

wallflower wrote: post #4

> The first was the quality that caused my YC cofounders to nickname me "The Social Radar." I was one of those kids that you just couldn’t get anything past. If something seemed off or out of character, I noticed and made inquiries. I was always trying to figure things out based on subtle social cues. > When it came to investing, I had something that my cofounders didn’t have: I was the Social Radar. I couldn’t judge…

> Perhaps the unreplicable advantage of YC in its early years.

I think PG had said she was their secret weapon for many years, when there were other accelerators copying them left and right.

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#34

Post by reilly3000 »

What a great piece. There is a distinctive quality that YC's alum have in common has shaped the rest of the software world. Would Microsoft be reshaping its culture as it is without Dropbox, Stripe, Reddit and others demonstrating a new way to operate, a new set of values? The world is better off IMHO with the ethic that Jessica helped create. Go English Majors!

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#35

Post by staunch »

I absolutely grant that Livingston was crucial to YC's success but it would be wrong to ignore the reality of what holds most people back: lack of opportunity.

The opportunity that Paul Graham gave Jessica Livingston is being massively underplayed here. He would not have chosen to start YC without her but he could have. It very well might've failed without her. That's entirely possible. But she absolutely could not have started YC without him and his money. She would have had no opportunity to become the great success story she has become.

YC partners fund ~3% of the founders that ask them for opportunity. That leaves ~97% of people out in the cold, desperate for the same kind of opportunity that made them successful.

The reason YC funds so few founders used to be their limited resources. Now they have all the resources they could possibly want and they've consciously chosen not to scale. YC has become a VC firm that is perpetuating exactly the problem they were founded to fix. It's an exclusive club for the chosen few and a mark against anyone that is not granted membership. Just like the old elitist VCs they were supposed to replace.

I don't begrudge YC or any of its partners their personal success. I do think YC has gone from being a potentially great force for good to probably a net negative for society.

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#36

Post by sonnyblarney »

patkai wrote: post #8

Jeez, how painful to think that she has to explain her role regularly just because she is a woman. My wife and I are both software developers, and recently moved from Helsinki to Berlin, with two kids. If you could see the faces when we tell people how we moved here, "with _her_ job" :D First they look at her, like "does she look the part", and then looking at me, like "what does he really do?" It's actually fun, and…

The vast majority of people who get 'moved for jobs' are regular professionals - and especially in Europe, they look the part.

I walked into a store once in Ottawa, and bought some expensive kids stuff, the owner said: "Are you a software developer" and I said 'how'd you know'? ... Because almost everyone who can afford her stuff is a lawyer, government exec, banker, or otherwise professional.

So I'd say the bulk of it is to the people you tell ... it's an anomaly, that's all.

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#37

Post by [deleted] »

staunch wrote: post #35

I absolutely grant that Livingston was crucial to YC's success but it would be wrong to ignore the reality of what holds most people back: lack of opportunity. The opportunity that Paul Graham gave Jessica Livingston is being massively underplayed here. He would not have chosen to start YC without her but he could have. It very well might've failed without her. That's entirely possible. But she absolutely could not h…

[deleted]

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#39

Post by dennisgorelik »

staunch wrote: post #35

I absolutely grant that Livingston was crucial to YC's success but it would be wrong to ignore the reality of what holds most people back: lack of opportunity. The opportunity that Paul Graham gave Jessica Livingston is being massively underplayed here. He would not have chosen to start YC without her but he could have. It very well might've failed without her. That's entirely possible. But she absolutely could not h…

> a net negative for society

Where did that come from?

Even if YC is "elitist" now -- that does NOT mean "negative for society".

Re: Grow the Puzzle Around You

#40

Post by omeid2 »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #39
staunch wrote: post #35

I absolutely grant that Livingston was crucial to YC's success but it would be wrong to ignore the reality of what holds most people back: lack of opportunity. The opportunity that Paul Graham gave Jessica Livingston is being massively underplayed here. He would not have chosen to start YC without her but he could have. It very well might've failed without her. That's entirely possible. But she absolutely could not h…

> a net negative for society Where did that come from? Even if YC is "elitist" now -- that does NOT mean "negative for society".

I am uncertain of the staunch analysis but I believe they're making the argument that YC gives a massive advantage to startups that are part of it, and staunch believes that the selection process is unfair, so it follows that YC gives unfair advantage which can be reasonably seen as net negative.
Post reply on HN