51–60 of 81 posts
Actual full interview, "Risky Business": https://www.startups.com/library/founder-stories/marc-andree...
Url changed now from https://allenleein.github.io/2020/03/11/pmarca-flying-car.ht....
To me, the next great challenge of our time isn't finding the next SpaceX, but gradually dismantling the corporate dogma of full employment. The short-term goals should be along the lines of getting to a 30-hour work week, a single-payer healthcare system, free college and UBI from an automation moonshot. The long-term goals should be about how to get everyone in the world self-actualized, but doing it sustainably so…
Whoa! Zack, I am a reporter for a local paper and I'd like to interview you for a piece about humble internet futurists. Could you give me your email so that I could send you a couple questions about rolling back corporate dogma and achieving 30 hour work weeks?
>> Those companies have to be run completely differently because the stakes are so much higher. I can't dismiss Elons drive, ability to get his hands dirty, and many other characteristics. But the primary difference I see in this comparison is simply risk aversion. YC and their VCs are in it to make money by placing a number of small bets, knowing some will be losers. To go big like SpaceX requires you to be all in.…
You could also argue that this is exactly the problem with Elon. He constantly makes statements that are completely out of bounds or fraudulent ($420 funding secured, solar shingles, auto pilot claims, vehicle safety concerns, rocket explosions, etc).
I would argue this is reckless and will end up causing way more harm than good at the end of this. If you don't have risk management, you aren't going to be effectively run safety critical companies.
> SpaceX could just own the launch industry by cutting cost for a while, or sit back and enjoy higher profits from reusability.
The launch industry is extraordinarily small all things considered, and there's no way SpaceX would be able to justify its valuation without pie-in-the-sky dreams like Starlink as well.
>> Those companies have to be run completely differently because the stakes are so much higher. I can't dismiss Elons drive, ability to get his hands dirty, and many other characteristics. But the primary difference I see in this comparison is simply risk aversion. YC and their VCs are in it to make money by placing a number of small bets, knowing some will be losers. To go big like SpaceX requires you to be all in.…
> He's willing to take that risk because he's in it for the results, not the money. Well put. Whatever anyone has to say about the man, the most incredible thing about Elon is that he finds ways to pursue his crazy ideals while somehow staying profitable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He's willing to take that risk because he's in it for the results, not the money. Well put. Whatever anyone has to say about the man, the most incredible thing about Elon is that he finds ways to pursue his crazy ideals while somehow staying profitable.
He talked about this in an interview. Something to the effect of 'When I was in college, I tested how little I could live on. Turns out rice and beans are really cheap. So even if I fail, I'm not going to starve.' Admittedly, kids and spouses change ones opinion on that, but it's a fair way to keep perspective, even after becoming rich.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> would it be possible to predict which company would flourish? I'd say both have good chances. I'm actually surprised BO doesn't have better achievements by now. > Both looked like jokes at the time to my aerospace colleagues. I assume some aerospace professionals still consider them jokes, which weights on definition of professional. But SpaceX really does things differently - the pioneers of space era (like von Br…
One thing stands out is how hands-on Musk has been. He's got a physics degree and has the raw intelligence and passion to understand aerospace engineering. From his public statements, he shows an understanding of mechanical engineering WAY beyond most executives'. Bezos has been hands-off with BO and is not technical. Similar with Vern Raburn (Microsoftie pilot) trying to run Eclipse Aviation (nearly into the ground,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He's [Musk] got a physics degree and has the raw intelligence and passion to understand aerospace engineering. musk was nearly laughed out of early meetings because he basically knew nothing about aerospace engineering and was viewed as just a guy with a lot of money, enthusiasm, and naivety. i have never seen any indication that he understands as much as people freely give him credit for. > Bezos ... is not techni…
Well, I'm not sure what part of the SpaceX timeline you are talking about but his "money, enthusiasm, and naivety" certainly has brought the company very, very far in the past 17+ years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He's willing to take that risk because he's in it for the results, not the money. Well put. Whatever anyone has to say about the man, the most incredible thing about Elon is that he finds ways to pursue his crazy ideals while somehow staying profitable.
> crazy ideals while somehow staying profitable His main ideal, making humanity multi-planetary, requires a great deal of profitability, because it's almost nobody else's goal. My opinion is that he will, when the time is right, sell his holdings in Tesla and dump all of that right back into SpaceX or whatever entity is pushing the ball forward.
Whenever I hear someone like Andreessen who is still a cryptocurrency believer, I go and really look for what he's talking about. I find nothing. I also have a routine search that I do when I look for something built on cryptocurrency or the cryptocurrency ecosystem (e.g. Ethereum "dapps") that I might want to actually use. I always come up empty handed. Yet there are many smart people that believe in this stuff. Are…
The real issue with blockchain is it doesn’t work yet. It doesn’t scale, and complex trustless scalable guarantees aren’t possible yet. The technology is also really new. Bitcoin coin is only ten years old.
>> Those companies have to be run completely differently because the stakes are so much higher. I can't dismiss Elons drive, ability to get his hands dirty, and many other characteristics. But the primary difference I see in this comparison is simply risk aversion. YC and their VCs are in it to make money by placing a number of small bets, knowing some will be losers. To go big like SpaceX requires you to be all in.…
> To go big like SpaceX requires you to be all in. Elon nearly went broke a couple times. He's willing to take that risk because he's in it for the results, not the money. You could also argue that this is exactly the problem with Elon. He constantly makes statements that are completely out of bounds or fraudulent ($420 funding secured, solar shingles, auto pilot claims, vehicle safety concerns, rocket explosions, et…