Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#31

Post by baudehlo » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 1:15 AM UTC

badloginagain wrote: post #5

I really like the bits of historical interest that comes out in the interview, naval battles and Archimedes- you get the sense that he just loves learning, even if it's not "useful" knowledge. What I like most is how that just comes out as supplementary asides, reinforcing a point or framing a metaphor. Definitely the kind of guy you could just talk to for hours.

He's a very interesting guy who I thoroughly enjoyed interacting with at the anti spam conferences he set up. As a speaker at the conference we got to visit his home where he graciously hosted many anti spam geeks with his own resources. Our conversations were always interesting and funny - he has that smart almost British wit about him.

He's been incredibly lucky to be a smart person who managed to make his seed money, and then use it very wisely to turn it into what I guess is now many times what he invested.

It is a shame he has become so busy lately that he can't interact as easily with the "common man" any more. I emailed him not long ago and got no reply. I guess that happens when you have hundreds or thousands of emails in your inbox every day (a problem he has listed often as one he'd like to see solved by a startup).

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#32

Post by seiji » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 1:46 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #19

I really liked his idea that the users teach you about what you've made. That's a really great philosophical point. I think his comments about open source are interesting and how he's never seen anybody open source too much. I humbly disagree, I've definitely seen a few startups get nowhere because they ended up open sourcing their entire product, meaning nobody needed to pay them for anything. There needs to be a st…

Office and Windows. Okay, now where do they make their money? They're pretty much just left with services work, and services and support often only exist if the software has problems.

Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems?

Fun fact: open source support isn't about fixing problems, it's about having someone to contractually blame in case of any problems, not because there are problems. It's more CYA and less TBD.

Also see the MonogDB model — release an open source platform full of bugs and data loss edge cases, target people who don't really know what they're doing so they build prototypes and platforms on top of it, then tell companies they have to pay you if they want any help (and they will need help since the platform is fundamentally flawed in the first place).

Anybody else can then come along

Technically, yes. But has that ever happened? If you open source your 5 million line code base, you still have the expertise, not some outsider.

There's also the reverse problem of open source platforms with no owner (e.g. the ecosystem of ever-growing, zero-authority hadoop vomit).

Open sourcing needs to have a valid business strategy

The valid business strategy is nobody will trust you if you aren't open source these days. The age of vendor-vanish = product-vanish is quickly going away. Companies (as buyers) prefer widely used and open source solutions in favor of closed source voodoo that works "just because we say so" with bad documentation and a tiny userbase.

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#33

Post by seiji » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 1:55 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #29

tectonic wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What startups have you seen opensource too much?

There was an enterprise cloud company I once worked with. They had built a layer on top of HDFS and some nice admin tools to go along with it. Their customers hired them to build out systems that would provide in-house clouds and their tooling helped make HDFS deployment, management and integration a bit easier. They decided to open source all of their software at some point which meant their model went from: - Provi…

developing it all was what the business was about

It is interesting how some software is more amenable to being "business open source" than others.

If your software is touching online, realtime, and mission-critical data, that's a good fit for open source + support / add-ons. You can sell add-ons and ease of use and peace of mind. Some databases have been good open source companies, some have failed, and some are just chugging along not being successes or failures (definitely counts as a VC failure though if you're not a breakthrough success).

If your software is more off-line, or one-time use, or "nice to have" (e.g. a great text editor or a great file upload utility or... sysadmin HDFS deployment helpers) and you currently charge $100/seat for your magic sauce, that seems to be an awful fit for open source. Everybody would use it for free and never consider buying anything from you since it's not "real time mission critical."

Open source is preferred to maintain strong data portability, avoid vendor lock-in, avoid vendor future price increase/licensing shenanigans, and also to get a stronger pool of employees since many may likely have used common popular OSS platforms elsewhere too (less re-training needed in many cases for new hires).

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#34

Post by seiji » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 1:59 AM UTC

badloginagain wrote: post #5

I really like the bits of historical interest that comes out in the interview, naval battles and Archimedes- you get the sense that he just loves learning, even if it's not "useful" knowledge. What I like most is how that just comes out as supplementary asides, reinforcing a point or framing a metaphor. Definitely the kind of guy you could just talk to for hours.

Always a good re-read: The world was out to dupe and enslave you, but he, Paul Graham, was — disinterestedly, dispassionately — going to get you out of here alive, armed only with Lisp, random facts about medieval Florence, and deep knowledge of Business Things.

http://www.evanmiller.org/the-other-money-problem.html

It's scary how many of pg's early startup article titles can be rephrased as "Top 10 secrets VCs don't want you to know!"

Establishing brands/personalities is easier when you are sharing elite wisdom with unwashed masses. It makes the reader feel special and in some ways indebted to you (even if that wasn't the intended effect in the first place).

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#35

Post by bane » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 2:06 AM UTC

seiji wrote: post #32

bane wrote: post #19

I really liked his idea that the users teach you about what you've made. That's a really great philosophical point. I think his comments about open source are interesting and how he's never seen anybody open source too much. I humbly disagree, I've definitely seen a few startups get nowhere because they ended up open sourcing their entire product, meaning nobody needed to pay them for anything. There needs to be a st…

Office and Windows. Okay, now where do they make their money? They're pretty much just left with services work, and services and support often only exist if the software has problems. Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems? Fun fact: open source support isn't about fixing problems, it's about having someone to contractually blame in case of any problems, not because there are problems. It'…

> Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems?

No, I think you misread or I wasn't clear. Microsoft (and other companies) support service contracts exist purely because of inadequacies in the software. Microsoft wins twice because they sell the software and sell/certify the service organizations.

> Technically, yes. But has that ever happened? If you open source your 5 million line code base, you still have the expertise, not some outsider.

Yes. Why do you think your employees will stay with your company forever?

All a competitor has to do is put out a job req "looking for expert in foo, will pay top $$$" and hire away your expert staff. This does happen and it often happens because purchasing organizations prefer to "separate interests" between vendors and service companies hoping that it forces vendors to build better software that require fewer services. This creates a market for service competitors, and if they're willing to make smaller margins, can pay your people, the people you have in your company doing service work more.

For example, how many people who don't work for Red Hat offer Red Hat support services?

> The valid business strategy is nobody will trust you if you aren't open source these days.

I don't really disagree. Which is why you need to have a strategy that lets you check the "is open source" box with a buyer, while still protecting your business advantage.

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#36

Post by seiji » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 2:12 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #35

seiji wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Office and Windows. Okay, now where do they make their money? They're pretty much just left with services work, and services and support often only exist if the software has problems. Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems? Fun fact: open source support isn't about fixing problems, it's about having someone to contractually blame in case of any problems, not because there are problems. It'…

> Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems? No, I think you misread or I wasn't clear. Microsoft (and other companies) support service contracts exist purely because of inadequacies in the software. Microsoft wins twice because they sell the software and sell/certify the service organizations. > Technically, yes. But has that ever happened? If you open source your 5 million line code base, y…

For example, how many people who don't work for Red Hat offer Red Hat support services?

Oh, I've no idea. I'd only go to RedHat for "official" RedHat support?

Another intersecting approach is something like Postgres or MySQL. The ownership of the code is irrelevant at this point and we just have independent consultancies (or integrators) providing expert-level services. But, that's almost a complete inversion of the original premise here of open sourcing your own product while retaining product control + revenue from control of said product. (which sounds like what you're afraid of most general "we open sourced our product" situations devolving into.)

In general, I've seen little interest from random Internet companies in providing support for private open sourced software. Nobody wants to spend months/years understanding your software to compete against your knowledge/expertise (unless you get really successful, but that's a whole other game).

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#37

Post by logicallee » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 2:22 AM UTC

FlaceBook wrote: post #25

bane wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PG always came across to me as unusually thoughtful and smart and friendly (let's be honest he's a great guy), but never enjoyed the kind of combative debate that goes on in web forums.

> PG always came across to me as unusually thoughtful and smart and friendly (let's be honest he's a great guy) He's also amazing and incredible and handsome and witty and strong and I love him oh so much.

if your point is that your parent commenter is sucking up, it misses the mark. there's no particular reason to say nice things about PG - other than that somebody feels that way.

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#38

Post by bane » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 2:42 AM UTC

seiji wrote: post #36

bane wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems? No, I think you misread or I wasn't clear. Microsoft (and other companies) support service contracts exist purely because of inadequacies in the software. Microsoft wins twice because they sell the software and sell/certify the service organizations. > Technically, yes. But has that ever happened? If you open source your 5 million line code base, y…

For example, how many people who don't work for Red Hat offer Red Hat support services? Oh, I've no idea. I'd only go to RedHat for "official" RedHat support? Another intersecting approach is something like Postgres or MySQL. The ownership of the code is irrelevant at this point and we just have independent consultancies (or integrators) providing expert-level services. But, that's almost a complete inversion of the…

> Oh, I've no idea. I'd only go to RedHat for "official" RedHat support?

Let's just say, it's pretty big.

Bonus, you don't need to hire an outside firm to administer your Red Hat servers if you just hire somebody with "can administer Red Hat" on a job req.

Here's a short list just to fill out your curiosity (the real one is likely much longer):

http://www.linuxit.com/linux-support-services/

http://www.dcvast.com/software_support_services/redhat_linux...

http://www.netdigix.com/

http://h17007.www1.hp.com/us/en/enterprise/servers/supportma...

and so on.

Red Hat as a company more or less exists these days on name brand. In fact, their EBITD margin is negative despite their stock price riding high.

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#39

Post by marincounty » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 4:27 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #17

alayne wrote: post #6

I wish Paul would give posting on hn another shot. I'm sure he's busy, but I always thought he had interesting perspectives even if I didn't always agree.

PG always came across to me as unusually thoughtful and smart and friendly (let's be honest he's a great guy), but never enjoyed the kind of combative debate that goes on in web forums.

Or, he doesn't care? Or, he uses a pseudonym? I hope he doesn't care? I want to think he has enough political influence to get to the truth? Or, uses some of his money to right society's wrongs? But, I don't know the man, nor what he really values? I did get interested in Lisp, when I found this site?

Re: Fireside Chat with Paul Graham [video]

#40

Post by justintocci » Sat, Jul 04, 2015, 4:32 AM UTC

seiji wrote: post #32

bane wrote: post #19

I really liked his idea that the users teach you about what you've made. That's a really great philosophical point. I think his comments about open source are interesting and how he's never seen anybody open source too much. I humbly disagree, I've definitely seen a few startups get nowhere because they ended up open sourcing their entire product, meaning nobody needed to pay them for anything. There needs to be a st…

Office and Windows. Okay, now where do they make their money? They're pretty much just left with services work, and services and support often only exist if the software has problems. Did you just casually imply Office and Windows don't have problems? Fun fact: open source support isn't about fixing problems, it's about having someone to contractually blame in case of any problems, not because there are problems. It'…

>The valid business strategy is nobody will trust you if you aren't open source these days.

i disagree. there are many big saas businesses out there and few open source anything.