Live data from Hacker News

I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

news.ycombinator.com

331–340 of 618 posts

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#331

not a question just a comment - I read The Lean Startup years ago, still think about it about once a week. I regularly give away copies to people starting companies who I see going down a bad path with no tight feedback loop.

Thank you so much.

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#332
post #259

hi Eric, the 'lean startup' & the work you & Steve Blank did was revolutionary in terms of getting products to market quicker. what are the 'slower' go to market channels that you've seen produce sustainable results also producing sustainable businesses. not the come fast, die fast kind ?

One of the least read parts of The Lean Startup is the chapter on what I call engines of growth. This is my attempt to elucidate what I call the law of sustainable growth, meaning a situation where new customers come as a necessary side effect of the actions of past customers.

Not really related to your question, but Steve recently wrote a great article about the new book that, if you're a fan of his, you might like too: https://steveblank.com/2026/06/09/incorruptible/

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#334

Eric, it's interesting the companies you've picked that "structurally resist gravity" and the ones you've left out. Costco, Patagonia, and Nova Nordisk are all interesting cases. But you're missing Mondragon, Equal Exchange, King Arthur Flour, and many others. Basically, you appear to be focusing on investor owned companies and missing the entire class of worker cooperatives where the financial gravity you're talking…

Both Mondragon and King Arthur Flour are in the book. I'm not familiar with Equal Exchange, but now that you've mentioned it, I'm going to go learn more.

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#335

I don't have any questions for you. Just wanted to thank you for writing Lean Startup, it was very influential to me.

You're so welcome. Thank you for writing such a nice comment, especially in a situation like this when other people have been... less generous.

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#337

I worked for a lean startup that built a very expensive hardware product. The company kept the team as small as possible and took a ship fast and iterate approach. They shipped hardware that had numerous design and manufacturing defects and failure rates were very high, over 50% required replacement after 2.5 years. For a while the company was relatively generous with out-of-warranty replacements, which helped mitiga…

I tried to address this in The Lean Startup and also in the follow-up book The Startup Way. Cutting corners, making crap does not help you test your thesis. What's needed is not to ape the techniques and tactics that work in another industry like software, but to really think from first principles about what will create sustained iteration speed even in a hardware context. In The Startup Way, in particular, I give a bunch of examples, including a bunch from old school manufacturing contexts that have applied these techniques successfully.

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#338

Costco is interesting. I've always find it an interesting dichotomy between their public image, retail worker reputation, and corporate reputation. The former two are fantastic. I live in Seattle metro area where they are headquartered, and the last is horrible. I've had more than one recruiter tell me it's a classic, blue collar, "we've always done it this way" environment since many of their corporate people rose t…

I definitely don't want to paint Costco as perfect. It wouldn't surprise me at all if their ethos is not especially attractive to people who want to work on the tech side of their business. I can easily imagine that at some point that is going to cause some kind of problem for them. But I can also imagine that it's just a very distinctive culture that's not for everybody. The truth is, I don't really know because I've never worked there.

Re: I'm Eric Ries, author of "The Lean Startup" and new book "Incorruptible" – AMA

#339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was at Google when it pulled out of China. GP's post reminds me a lot of early Google - it wasn't evil because there were people in high places, who were critical to its operations, who cared deeply about doing the right thing , and as a result other people who cared about doing the right thing felt like they had cover, and people who were willing to do the wrong thing to hit a short-term number found that they wer…

> A lot of it also had to do with declining market power: when Google was universally on top, they felt like they could do the right thing without serious negative consequences, but when they were fighting for control of a market, they felt they had to make compromises lest some other firm (being honest: Facebook) would end up in power and do the wrong thing anyway. I would argue it's not a real value if you are not…

> I would argue it's not a real value if you are not willing to lose something in order to hold on to it. It is admirable to want to do the right thing when you can get away with doing the wrong thing. It is only a true value if you are willing to do the right thing when you cannot get away with doing the right thing.

I don't think it's that simple.

For example, let's say your desire is to minimize harm in Area X. While you're on top and in control of Area X, then you can do that easily enough. Suddenly a competitor comes whose values show they're willing to do lots of harm to Area X. And if they beat you in the capitalistic marketplace and gain more control, they'll be able to do lots of harm. In order to beat them, you may have to do a little bit of harm to Area X, which goes against your values. But in doing so, you retain control, and prevent even greater harm to Area X. Is that not a "real" value?

Would it be a "real" value to staunchly refuse to do a little harm to Area X, even if you know that this will result in greater harm in the long run?

This is why I distrust simple ideologies. The world is not simple.

Post reply on HN