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

Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 394 posts

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#351

Post by Dracophoenix »

wittycardio wrote: post #347
Dracophoenix wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Progress comes from individuals. MIT did not endow Claude Shannon with divine knowledge of Boolean algebra and information theory. He discovered it himself.

Claude Shannon was able to do what he was able to do because of the ample research funding and the academic environment. I have great respect for people like Claude Shannon but they require an ecosystem to be able to do their work.

There were plenty of electrical engineers at MIT working on differential analyzers when Shannon worked on his paper. Why Shannon and not them? Funding and ecosystems don't make technological revolutions anymore than they make cures for diseases. After all, the four papers that revolutionized physics in the early 20th century were composed by a 24-year old patent clerk. Someone has to do the job of thinking and putting those ideas to paper. This is a requirement of any great idea irrespective of funding or people. Thinking is an individual pursuit for an individual reward.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#352

Post by TapWaterBandit »

ryandrake wrote: post #207
spicymaki wrote: post #114

Feudalism without the serfs. What is in it for the plebs? The idea that concentrated wealth is great for everyone and will trickle down has been pretty much debunked to the point where the wealthy are openly stating we don't need the masses anymore. The crypto dystopian nightmare of generating money with zero utility backed by quantitative easing demonstrates that you don't actually need many employees to generate we…

It can be helpful to think of the USA as a giant factory that produces billionaires. Dollars and workers go into the factory as inputs, billionaires (and defects, millionaires) come out on the assembly line, and the system's waste product that gets discarded is the lives and livelihoods of working and middle-class people. So the system is working and producing what it is supposed to produce.

This is one of the dumber takes I've ever seen on hacker news. Completely blinded by envy.

Where do you think all this stuff comes from exactly (or how is it paid for):

- the food in your pantry

- the stuff in your home

- the vehicles/PT you use to get around in

- the devices you use

- the content you watch/play

- the utilities you use to power it all/get water

- the services like banking you use

- the clothes you wear

- all the other forms of infrastructure like medical care/policing/fire brigades

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#353

Post by janalsncm »

ceronman wrote: post #16

He is implying that founders can create a lot of value without employees, and that the claim that employees also create value is false. If that's true, then what about a social experiment: If you are a solo founder, you get all your profits for yourself. But if you have employees, you have to share your profits with your employees. If employees don't produce any value, easy, fire them all, you get everything. But if…

I believe what you’re describing is a worker-owned co-op. Workers get a vote in business decisions.

They have some interesting properties and I wonder how they would stack up against a top-down structure like in a corporation or university. Specifically I wonder if they would be able to resist bureaucratic bloat and the growth of the managerial class that plagues mature companies and organizations.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#354

Post by koonsolo »

ceronman wrote: post #16

He is implying that founders can create a lot of value without employees, and that the claim that employees also create value is false. If that's true, then what about a social experiment: If you are a solo founder, you get all your profits for yourself. But if you have employees, you have to share your profits with your employees. If employees don't produce any value, easy, fire them all, you get everything. But if…

Here's another experiment: All employees share the losses as well. Company makes a huge loss, employees are liable.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#355

Post by otikik »

overrun11 wrote: post #256
toast0 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is, this is achievable even at 10M. $10M does get you a nice time, and you would never have to say no to any reasonable expense, but it's also definitely possible to overspend. There's some higher threshold where you really can be 'wild and crazy' and the only way to run out of money would be through bad investments. There's a difference between always flying first class, always flying on a jetshare, and…

10M would give you a safe withdrawal rate somewhere between 300-400k a year. A fairly common household income for people on HN. It affords a very nice quality of life but you're certainly not living the lifestyle that most people think of as "rich."

It’s the other way around. Most people think of it as rich.

Tech workers in SF don’t.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#356

Post by codegeek »

ceronman wrote: post #16

He is implying that founders can create a lot of value without employees, and that the claim that employees also create value is false. If that's true, then what about a social experiment: If you are a solo founder, you get all your profits for yourself. But if you have employees, you have to share your profits with your employees. If employees don't produce any value, easy, fire them all, you get everything. But if…

My experience is that employees just for the sake of employees are of no use and a lot of companies have too much fat just because they could hire. Great employees though are worth every penny and a whole lot more.

As a small company, I have hired and fired few people over the years. When I made the wrong hire, it cost a lot not just in terms of money but the overhead, mental anguish and loss in productivity. Sometimes I got lucky and hired some exceptional people. They have made life 2x better and yes they do get rewarded accordingly at least in my company.

Not all employees produce equal (even if same job title and experience on paper) and it is a fact.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#357

Post by wing-_-nuts »

type-r wrote: post #339
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to remind myself that there are people comfortable with such a 'wild and crazy' lifestyle. While I wouldn't mind being very well off, I have a visceral gut reaction to any of the sort of flashy spending that draws attention to myself. I also find that it isolates you from the experience of the common man, and life is lonely enough as it is.

it's interesting that it's very common to have a disdain / discomfort with showing that you have that money, but no such corresponding problem with just having it. if you're not going to give the money away, i don't see how there's any benefit to not spending. you're still way richer.

Eh, any money you have invested generates income. That income can be used for your expenses or given to charity, depending on what your needs are for a given year.

After I hit my 'retirement number', if I can find a job that will give me the flexibility I want in retirement, I plan on continuing to work 2-3 days a week and donating half my salary to charity.

God knows local charities can use my money far more than they can use me as a volunteer. I like coding, and if I get paid and do good in the world, so much the better.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#358

Post by wittycardio »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #351
wittycardio wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude Shannon was able to do what he was able to do because of the ample research funding and the academic environment. I have great respect for people like Claude Shannon but they require an ecosystem to be able to do their work.

There were plenty of electrical engineers at MIT working on differential analyzers when Shannon worked on his paper. Why Shannon and not them? Funding and ecosystems don't make technological revolutions anymore than they make cures for diseases. After all, the four papers that revolutionized physics in the early 20th century were composed by a 24-year old patent clerk. Someone has to do the job of thinking and puttin…

There is both an individual contribution and a societal contribution. No one is denying the individual contribution. But none of YC types had anything to do with inventing the internet but feel like they are the only ones who deserve it's rewards. They haven't created anything like information theory. It's mostly been about fleecing retail investors. More SBF and less Shannon

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#359

Post by testmasterflex »

riskable wrote: post #310
testmasterflex wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://loodio.com - Hardware company - Solo founder - No employees and same here; I don't see the need for any in the forseeable future. Don't even need capital as my burn rate is ~$50/month except when I order new stock. Weird times.

How do you get the devices made and shipped to customers? Do you ship them yourself or are you paying someone for that too? Asking because I might start selling hardware soon too and the prospect of turning my garage into a customer fulfillment center doesn't sound fun.

Assembling and sending from home currently. 3PL too early in current volumes.

Re: Automation enables founders to grow companies with fewer and fewer employees

#360

Post by Apocryphon »

friedman23 wrote: post #345
pixl97 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN suffers from a higher than average amounts of narcissism when it comes to being "Temporarily depressed millionaires" when thinking they will be the ones at the top of the pyramid. The few here that are near the top of the pyramid seem to forget that their high position tend to forget that position is supported by the base below them and if they don't perform maintenance on the base the entire thing collapses. Huma…

[flagged]

You can do both, Disco Elysium is a recent example that springs to mind.
Post reply on HN