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

We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

evernote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 236 posts

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#31

Post by theorique »

cllns wrote: post #24
calinet6 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correction: zero tolerance for a system they've spent their entire lives within that never taught them the right way to think about their position in society.

Maybe. This is a tough point. The 'system' obviously sucks but I don't want to skirt personal responsibility. It's the upper-middle class straight white cisgendered male's fault if he doesn't take the time to learn about his privilege. He has the resources, but chooses to ignore it. (Note: I'm not saying the person from the article necessarily fits this description; I'm speaking more generally)

It's the upper-middle class straight white cisgendered male's fault if he doesn't take the time to learn about his privilege. He has the resources, but chooses to ignore it.

What's in it for him?

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#32

Post by jzellis »

lubujackson wrote: post #28

The innovator-iterator argument seems to be a red herring. The real issue here is building bullshit apps vs. helpful apps. I think focusing on making helpful apps is a more important message to developers than trying to "fix poverty in Africa" which is a nice goal but not something any web developer is likely going to impact. The reality is no one is going to come up with an idea like mFarm without REALLY understandi…

Absolutely agreed. Which is why I'm trying to specifically do that right now. (If it's not obvious, I'm the guy who delivered this speech.)

But I absolutely disagree that web developers can't impact poverty in Africa (or, maybe more importantly, in their own town). To be perfectly frank, I merely think most of us in this industry don't give a shit one way or another. Which is fine, but I'm perfectly happy to judge people all day long for thinking that way. ;-)

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#33

Post by jiggy2011 »

lmm wrote: post #11

Are porn sites really that easy to make money from? The impression I've had from here is that while there's lots of money to be made, there's also lots of competition and the business relationships you need can be difficult to obtain and keep.

The business models that seem to work in porn are either:

1) Provide lots of free content, get users to upload it themselves and just be on hand to deal with DMCA takedowns etc. SEO the hell out of your site with every technique you can get your hands on, finance it with aggressive ads and concentrate your efforts on a/b testing to get the maximum number of ad clicks.

2) Produce high quality , unique content and charge for access. You need very regular updates (almost daily) and you need somebody full time issuing DMCA takedown notices in order to beat the pirates. Basically you need to make it easy for your customers to just sit back and fap rather than combing tube sites and closing popups to find the content they want.

It also seems to help if you can somehow sell it as "art porn" so that people won't feel embarrassed recommending it to their friends. Also perhaps build a community around the porn in some way.

Note: I don't work in porn, so I don't know too much but this seems to be my observations based on which sites stick around.

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#34

Post by alalonde »

lubujackson wrote: post #28

The innovator-iterator argument seems to be a red herring. The real issue here is building bullshit apps vs. helpful apps. I think focusing on making helpful apps is a more important message to developers than trying to "fix poverty in Africa" which is a nice goal but not something any web developer is likely going to impact. The reality is no one is going to come up with an idea like mFarm without REALLY understandi…

Or, even better, GO TO Kenya. Live there for a year. Travel around the country. Learn the language. When you come home you will not only have a handful of disruptive startup ideas, but, most importantly, an open mind about the disparate cultures of the world.

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#35

Post by tjbiddle »

I know this is the smallest part I could take out of the post.. but Fremont - Ghetto? Maybe OP meant East Palo Alto, or Oakland, but IMO Fremont is one of the safest, homey places to live in the Bay Area.

But then again, maybe I'm hanging out on that "One Block" - But I guess that block encompasses 12mi^2 :-).

More on topic - I wouldn't agree completely. Some startups are new completely, some are building things a little bit better, some are just using technology to re-invent something for the 21st century. If you're limiting your example startups then you can make any point you want.

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#36

Post by lelandbatey »

calinet6 wrote: post #21
rmrfrmrf wrote: post #15

This is the kind of post that happens when someone gets so wrapped up in startup land that they lose all context of the "real world." These "first world problem"-solving companies he's talking about are really just B2B companies made to help the ACTUAL, real-world problem solving companies do their jobs more easily. No customer cares about MailChimp. No consumer thinks about Twilio. They're not solving first-world pr…

This is all well and good, but I think the point is that there is an imbalance, and very few tech startups are going after the big problems these days. There are some notable ones, but it seems to be the road less traveled.

The impression I got was that the author was mostly upset with entrepreneurs patting themselves on the back for changing the world for the better with their "innovation" when they haven't actually done much to make the world better (though they may have innovated).

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#37

Post by orangethirty »

cllns wrote: post #10

> A few months ago, a startup developer friend said to me "I don't understand why poor kids, ghetto kids, don't do startups to get out of poverty." I've got just about zero tolerance left for people who don't acknowledge their privilege.

But they do. Let me explain. I grew up in a barrio, which is a latin ghetto. Junked cars in front lawns, domestic disturbances every night, shootings, drugs, all of that stuff. Every kid in there made money by pure hustle. There were no jobs available for any of us. Some kids cut hair (then went on to become barbers), others worked on cars, but most sold drugs. There were startups, but all were of the illegal variety. No one had any type of business permit, and almost everybody sold illegal substances (including alcohol).

Some people did make it out of poverty and went on to live productive lives. Others, the ones that sold drugs, either ended up being junkies, dead, jailed, or just disappeared. This due to the type of business they got into. I'm sure that had these kids gone into real businesses like mowing lawns, painting houses, working at a farm, selling eggs, or anything positive, they would be good productive people.

I was lucky. At age 9 I started selling candy. Then I joined Amway at age 14. Then I opened up my first (illegal) auto shop some years after. Why always had the option of selling drugs, but it just wasn't attractive as a business. For every sale I would make about a dollar. If I made 30 sales in a day (given the competition from other dealers), then I would be putting myself at risk for $210 week (you worked 7 days a week). Not worth it. I did not make that much selling candy, but at least I was not getting shot at. And with Amway, made twice as that much by selling soap.

Why did I make it out and not others? I was lucky. My parents were professionals, the only ones in the whole barrio. The other kid's parents were not. They also had to incur into dealing drugs, or other illegal activities. The issue is that these people did not do this because they wanted, they did so because they had no other option. Dealing drugs was the only job they could get, much less do. So the kids were grandfathered into selling drugs, too.

Can poor kids do startups to get out of poverty? Absolutely. But they need to have the right information to do so. Their parents need to have legal jobs available. But not fast food jobs, but real stuff. Construction workers, electricians, mechanics, etc. Those jobs are gone these days.

I'm just lucky to be a software engineer. My best friend? In jail.

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#38

Post by rmrfrmrf »

calinet6 wrote: post #21
rmrfrmrf wrote: post #15

This is the kind of post that happens when someone gets so wrapped up in startup land that they lose all context of the "real world." These "first world problem"-solving companies he's talking about are really just B2B companies made to help the ACTUAL, real-world problem solving companies do their jobs more easily. No customer cares about MailChimp. No consumer thinks about Twilio. They're not solving first-world pr…

This is all well and good, but I think the point is that there is an imbalance, and very few tech startups are going after the big problems these days. There are some notable ones, but it seems to be the road less traveled.

> This is all well and good, but I think the point is that there is an imbalance, and very few tech startups are going after the big problems these days.

But, my point is that these companies are indirectly going after the big problems by taking care of the little things. There are companies of 1 to 2 people who can now outsource almost every physical aspect of their service so that they can focus on their core product. Do I hire a team of sysadmins and technicians to maintain a server farm to 1) pay, 2) train, 3) meet with regularly, or do I simply host my service on AWS? One could argue that AWS is nothing but a first-world solution, but hey, it's responsible for hosting a HUGE number of companies! These "small", "iterative", "derivative" services can have a huge impact on industries. Just because they're not devoted to saving Africa or rescuing animals or ending world hunger doesn't mean they're not important.

> There are some notable ones, but it seems to be the road less traveled.

It's funny that you mention the 'road less traveled'. People use that phrase in allusion to Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken," where the narrator opines about coming to a fork in the road and wondering about how his life would be different had he taken the other path.

The funny part is that Frost was really being sarcastic and basically saying that it makes no difference which road you'll take. So yes, you can "go after the big problems" consciously and take that "road less traveled," but in the end, BOTH paths can result in solving big problems (or not solving anything).

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#39

Post by [deleted] »

theorique wrote: post #31
cllns wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. This is a tough point. The 'system' obviously sucks but I don't want to skirt personal responsibility. It's the upper-middle class straight white cisgendered male's fault if he doesn't take the time to learn about his privilege. He has the resources, but chooses to ignore it. (Note: I'm not saying the person from the article necessarily fits this description; I'm speaking more generally)

It's the upper-middle class straight white cisgendered male's fault if he doesn't take the time to learn about his privilege. He has the resources, but chooses to ignore it. What's in it for him?

[deleted]

Re: We call ourselves innovators, but most of us are really just iterators

#40

Post by orangethirty »

Being an iterator is the right thing to do. Real innovation happens over time (innovation follows the same process as evolution). You can't simply invent a car without a wheel. Imagine trying to build a car without every learning the dynamics of a wheel first. Instead of focusing on making new things, go ahead and pick something that exists and improve on it. Don't build the next Facebook, but improve upon it. Don't build the next Google, improve upon it (which is why I'm doing Nuuton). Iterate. Improve. In ten years, you will have a completely new product by working on the same old one.
Post reply on HN