Live data from Hacker News

How Universities Should Prepare Founders

paulgraham.com

41–50 of 333 posts

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#41
post #25

(Disclosure: I'm getting a PhD in CS now) > The hard part of startups is product: knowing what to build, and being able to build it Funny enough, this is why I think a PhD is undervalued by many. You spend years focused on a single area, sometimes pivoting topics, and getting hands on experience with operating solo on the outskirts of a particular field. The overall point of the degree is you learn how to learn. The…

In hindsight it was quite early in my career, but a bit over 20 years ago I felt burnt out in tech and wanted to try something new. I was share trading quite a bit so thought maybe I'd become a stock broker (online trading was only just starting to become a thing, so being a broker was still a real job at the time!). I finished the degree and got qualified, and while I loved the learning I discovered I hated the industry and that it wasn't for me.

But all of that discovery work, the financial planning, what their actual objectives were, having to dig into why someone wanted to buy a house, etc. proved to be some of the most invaluable and transferable skills I've learned (that, and SQL ;). A lot of that part of the course was learning how to ask questions, and learning how to follow-up to get past the superficial and often incorrect initial answers.

To your point I feel like there's these kind of meta skills that are transferable to many domains, but are sadly lacking these days from a lot of education that is hyper-focused on very role-specific qualifications. The ones that immediately come to mind:

- Learning how to learn (i.e., how to understand yourself, and improve)

- How to ask good questions (similar to above, but about others)

- And something I need a better label for because I just clumsily call it "sales", but in the Daniel Pink "To Sell is Human" style. Something like being able to structure a coherent and compelling narrative to other people. Clearly I fall short on this one.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#42
post #20

The article advocates lighter course load so ambitious undergrads can work on personal projects, some of which (preferably for the author) would be startup ideas. Glossing over the fact that ambitious undergrads are more likely to be ambitious about grad school rather than starting a company, and reducing their course work is a hindrance if anything. The goal of a physics degree is not to prepare you to start a busin…

Is it too late to get zuck back to whatever he was doing before his current activities?

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#43
post #37

I disagree with the underlying assumption that it's the universities responsibility to cultivate founders. Universities were initially built to further the knowledge of specific fields, for the sake of its own advancement, producing philosophers, artists and scientists. In other words, universities are for people to learn for the sake of learning, not to earn a wage. New institutions should be built to cultivate foun…

Although in principle I agree, cultivating founders could be an added mission.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#44
post #37

I disagree with the underlying assumption that it's the universities responsibility to cultivate founders. Universities were initially built to further the knowledge of specific fields, for the sake of its own advancement, producing philosophers, artists and scientists. In other words, universities are for people to learn for the sake of learning, not to earn a wage. New institutions should be built to cultivate foun…

Exactly. Answer: How universities of yore have “prepared” founders thus far. The premise of PG’s otherwise insightful prose is on shaky ground - or at the very least - debatable.

(I hope PG isn’t outsourcing his thinking to some agentic workflow.)

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#45
post #34
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not concerned with "groupies", but with the quality standard on HN, which the GP post was obviously below.

The "Gross." remark (Edit: now removed) at the end was unnecessary, but the bulk of the comment seems like a pretty legitimate question to me. It's telling that I see far worse HN comments on a daily basis that don't warrant a finger-wagging condemnation from you.

It's telling of the fact that we don't see most, or even 10%, of what gets posted here. There's far too much to read.

If you see a post that ought to have been moderated but hasn't been, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#46
Early internet founders were not CS majors. Most of them dropped out of college. They weren't seeking fortunes or careers. They were creatives, oddballs, outcasts, pirates!

Today, everyone is a founder. Founders of bubbles and bro culture. Herd-minds, chasing the Californian greed rush. Round 'em up, Angel Investors!

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#47
post #29
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not concerned with "groupies", but with the quality standard on HN, which the GP post was obviously below.

I edited the comment to contain only the question and not commentary.

I appreciate the edit, but now that I read the edited comment, I think I was responding mostly to the "Gross." bit.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#48
post #37

I disagree with the underlying assumption that it's the universities responsibility to cultivate founders. Universities were initially built to further the knowledge of specific fields, for the sake of its own advancement, producing philosophers, artists and scientists. In other words, universities are for people to learn for the sake of learning, not to earn a wage. New institutions should be built to cultivate foun…

That’s compatible with the thesis though. Read past the headline.

He says good founders learn actual stuff at college and get good at something, without any ambition to make it profitable initially.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#49

Mark Zuckerberg was good at programming, but he was a psychology major, not a CS major. "For Zuckerberg, the school’s major selling point was its Latin program. The current computer science concentrator originally intended to study classics at Harvard."[0] There's a book called Founders at Work by one J. Livingston. I'd suggest replacing Zuckerberg with an incredible founder who was interviewed in that book, Steve Pe…

Indeed, pg might be familiar with that author.

Re: How Universities Should Prepare Founders

#50
post #20

The article advocates lighter course load so ambitious undergrads can work on personal projects, some of which (preferably for the author) would be startup ideas. Glossing over the fact that ambitious undergrads are more likely to be ambitious about grad school rather than starting a company, and reducing their course work is a hindrance if anything. The goal of a physics degree is not to prepare you to start a busin…

Is it too late to get zuck back to whatever he was doing before his current activities?

Simul gradiuntur fractae spes ?

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49428589

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mip30YF1iuo

Post reply on HN