How to Start Google • Hacker News Board

Re: How to Start Google

#381

Post by newyankee » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:50 PM UTC

babl-yc wrote: post #317

I couldnt finish reading the essay because I was distracted by the generally smug tone of it. 99.99% of people who read this article are not going to start the next Google. Being a successful entrepreneur requires an incredible amount of luck, timing, skill, and risk taking. If you choose that path, great, but that in no way devalues the skill building, network building, and predictable income of working for someone…

I mean even basic math cannot uphold the thesis.

All the money and power in the world keeps consolidating upwards with the people closer to the apex of the pyramid deluding others that consistent climbing will help others reach there.

A tale as old as time, but due to exponential growth of tech playing out much faster.

Re: How to Start Google

#382

Post by etothepii » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:50 PM UTC

suyash wrote: post #18

Ok, so I am having a hard time buying the idea that just make a fun project if you want to create a something like 'Google'. Startup 101 teaches us that you need to solve a painful problem that lot of people have, that is the best way to create 'Google', so isn't the advise contradictory?

This advice is for 14/15 year olds. I think the advice would be different for 22-year-olds. It would be different still for 35-year-olds.

22-year-olds have a hard time selling to enterprises, 14-year-olds will find it impossible. Whereas if they build something cool that they and their friends love they will gain many of the skills that might be useful later on.

PG has made the point many times that the superpower 22-year-olds have is that they can live on ramen and work 16 hours a day. The superpower that 14-year-olds have is that (in many cases) they don't even need to find the $1,000 a month to survive.

Re: How to Start Google

#383

Post by downWidOutaFite » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:51 PM UTC

nsguy wrote: post #371

downWidOutaFite wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real trick that made Google possible, and the following web 2.0 era startups, was that linux and commodity hardware was all that was needed at the time so engineers could strike out on their own. Comparing it to the current ML era where you need many millions of dollars of data and many millions of dollars of hardware to compete, the guys that wrote the transformers paper are stuck in bigcorp and aren't going to…

These things always happen at intersections. There are lots of smart people with ideas. The magic happens at the intersection of ideas, time (what technology is available) and luck. Apple Newton was too early. Apple iPhone was just right. Doom 3D was just at the right time when commodity hardware could do what the amazing software needed it to do.

The point I was trying to make is what are the situation where an independent small startup can make it big. Your examples are instructive, engineers were able to make id Software big because you didn't need a lot of hardware to invent 3D shooters, but Jobs gets the credit for the iPhone because the engineers needed hundreds of millions of dollars in capital to pull it off.

pg is giving advice based on him getting rich from that period of time where the small startup could make it big. But those conditions are probably rare going forward.

Re: How to Start Google

#384

Post by jp57 » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:52 PM UTC

The trick is to start your own company. So it's not a trick for avoiding work, because if you start your own company you'll work harder than you would if you had an ordinary job. But you will avoid many of the annoying things that come with a job, including a boss telling you what to do.

This is literally true, but it's disingenuous. Not every job has a boss telling you what to do. Many jobs hire people for their expertise and pay them to solve problems for them, and in these kinds of jobs the employee collaborates with her boss on deciding what kinds of problems you will work on. Of course, it will only be enjoyable if the company's problems are aligned with the employee's interests.

If you are a technical expert with the kind of ability and acumen needed to run a successful start up, I would argue that it is at least as easy to find a company whose problems are aligned with your interests as to find investors who will truly let you pursue your own interests with their money.

"Making it" as a startup founder should be seen in the same class of success as making it as a rock star or an actor. There are lots of aspirants and hardly any of them succeed. Even though some manage to become wildly wealthy, the prior expected payoff is negative.

Re: How to Start Google

#385

Post by gcr » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:52 PM UTC

gizmo wrote: post #335

babl-yc wrote: post #317

I couldnt finish reading the essay because I was distracted by the generally smug tone of it. 99.99% of people who read this article are not going to start the next Google. Being a successful entrepreneur requires an incredible amount of luck, timing, skill, and risk taking. If you choose that path, great, but that in no way devalues the skill building, network building, and predictable income of working for someone…

The tone isn’t smug. pg simplified his language for a teenage audience. Simple arguments made simply can come across as smug because they lack caveats and polite hedging, but I don’t think the accusation of smugness sticks in this case. I also disagree about the incredible qualities entrepreneurs need and hardships they have to endure. Many incredible businesses are just good product + good distribution. Many kids th…

When I was a teen, I had a strong aversion for being talked down to, and was resistant to attempts to patronize even if they were well-intended and even if they benefited me.

Paul's leaving a significant fraction of the intended audience on the table here IMO: teens who are resistant to being told what to do and how to do it. :)

Re: How to Start Google

#386

Post by fuzzfactor » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:55 PM UTC

dade_ wrote: post #103

eddieroger wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was sad to search for the word "luck" and come up empty. You can do everything right and still fail. You can do everything wrong and win. Sometimes you're just in the right place at the right time, and that external factor is completely out of your control and can be the difference you need.

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Seneca

Even if you build a system that has no reliance whatsoever on the existence of good fortune, it can still be felled by a run of bad fortune.

Re: How to Start Google

#387

Post by ldjkfkdsjnv » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:56 PM UTC

downWidOutaFite wrote: post #369

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what is fundamentally missing from most talk about "tech" startups by VC types these days. They're not actually interested in the nerdy stuff, just in the "disruption" stuff. L&S were , and they hired other people who were. They didn't start with a business idea, but with a technical one. They filled in the blanks on the business side after they survived the .com crash. I didn't get to Google until 2011, but…

The real trick that made Google possible, and the following web 2.0 era startups, was that linux and commodity hardware was all that was needed at the time so engineers could strike out on their own. Comparing it to the current ML era where you need many millions of dollars of data and many millions of dollars of hardware to compete, the guys that wrote the transformers paper are stuck in bigcorp and aren't going to…

Wild to think that potentially the most innovative company of the last five years, and next five, was run/founded by a VC. It goes against all of the VC hate

Re: How to Start Google

#388

Post by alexsereno » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 9:58 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #37

Paul is fundamentally wrong with one thiing here: Larry knew google was going to be huge from the beginning. His brother Carl was already a multimillionare in tech and taught him everything required to set up a future successful company. Larry made it clear to me that he always planned Google to be a large cash-generating cow to invest in long-term AGI and there were only a few times at the beginning when he truly fe…

You know I remember hearing this way back in the early 2000s but forgot about it, Carl is pretty low key, no Wikipedia / etc

Re: How to Start Google

#389

Post by xanderlewis » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 10:00 PM UTC

> …get good at programming. That has been the source of the median startup for the last 30 years, and this is probably not going to change in the next 10.

Interesting comment; seems at odds with what a lot of others seem to think at the moment. But time will tell. I suspect he’s right.

Re: How to Start Google

#390

Post by nostrademons » Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 10:01 PM UTC

lupire wrote: post #349

nostrademons wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good manager is going to trust you to a large extent and not delve into the nitty-gritty of daily operations. With typical reporting loads in knowledge industries, they can’t - a manager with 10 reports realistically has 1-2 hours/week to spend on their projects once all the team overhead is taken care of. My reports absolutely can chill for a couple days, work only at night, or skip meetings. My job is to get them…

But what a report can't do is change the direction of a company or org leadership that is making bad decisions that lead to impossible demands governed by politics as ultra short-termism. Having the freedom to fail any way I want, but not be empowered to succeed, is a uniquely "employee" problem.

Sure, but there are many ways that VCs can force companies into incentive structures that put them in a failing position. If you include stupid executives and poor long-term decisions in the corporate model, you also have to include stupid VCs or board members and poor long-term decisions in the startup model.