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

What I Didn't Say

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 601 posts

Re: What I Didn't Say

#541

Post by acjohnson55 »

mistermann wrote: post #431
hooande wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reputation can be a blessing or a curse. YCombinator has a great reputation as the best startup incubator and it's founders have sterling reputations as being the people you absolutely need to talk to if you're considering a tech startup. It takes a lifetime to become known as superlative, the proverbial gold standard. It's as true on the mean streets as it is in the halls of power: You are what people think you ar…

> There are a variety of social and cultural factors that push the majority of women away from hacking at a young age. I can't point the finger of blame at anyone in particular, but I can report on what I have observed. Women are generally underrepresented in computer science departments, engineering programs, computer clubs and yes, startup incubators. I don't think women have to even be pushed away. I would assert…

I've really got to disagree with you there. When I think of female-dominated careers, nursing and teaching are what come to mind. And neither of those careers strike me as having a high "ratio of hours of fun to non-fun". Particularly since I've been a teacher before. My ratio is faaar better as a hacker than as a teacher.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#542

Post by jenandre »

I would be interested in the stats of 'successful' startup investments (for YC and otherwise), how many of those technical founders actually started programming at age ~13 (vs 17 or 18).

Would also be interested in seeing what the relative success/failures of investments with startup founders at 23 w/ 10 years experience (started programming in teams), vs 28 (who started programming at 18).

Re: What I Didn't Say

#543

Post by jusben1369 »

argumentum wrote: post #527
ericabiz wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those statements don't conflict. Not surprisingly, the female founders I talked to who felt that YC is a "frat house" did not apply or go to YC.

What does YC being a "frat house" have to do with applying though? I can understand why that perception may discourage someone from participating in YC, but the acceptance rate is so low that it seems like premature optimization to think beyond the application.

Why would you apply for something when you've determined that you're not going to accept even if you get in? Also, it seems irrational to spend time completing a form when you know there's a very small chance you'd be accepted and even if you were you would decline it? If the chances were very high, say 80%, you could say "Well, I have no intention now but I'll apply anyways just in case circumstances change and I do want to go" You can't even rationalize wasting time on a form when you know there's a small chance you even get the option of changing your mind.

(just to get more tangled the fact that she was accepted into a well known accelerator probably means she's not in the 'so low" category of acceptance)

Re: What I Didn't Say

#544

Post by _delirium »

RRiccio wrote: post #472
_delirium wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a plausible hypothesis, but it'd be interesting if someone were willing to test it experimentally. Some evidence for the hypothesis could be found if a "blind" YC batch did much worse than a typical YC batch, measured say 3 or 5 years in the future. Of course, with relatively small sample sizes nothing is likely to be proved beyond doubt, but it'd be interesting to know, and the amount of money needed to test…

While that might be worth experimenting, there's a high cost to it. Having high selection standards makes the network (YC's or any other) exponentially more valuable to those already in it. If you add a few not-so-good apples by mistake, there's no going back. Also, you have to consider how much quantitative and qualitative experience YC has accumulated, the partners are pretty good at telling in a couple minutes con…

> the partners are pretty good at telling in a couple minutes conversation if you're a strong founder

This is the part I doubt, though, if by "strong founder" you mean "statistically more likely to exit successfully than people selected according to much simpler 'dumb' criteria". These kinds of claims to predictive ability based on un-quantified holistic properties like "experience" rarely hold up under scientific scrutiny.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#545

Post by jusben1369 »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #284
mjburgess wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, he was mischaracterized and he replied. But jesus, > pg's response is actually priceless: it is like a soft-spoken witness upending a bullying lawyer who had just viciously attacked him, leaving the attacker reeling for all to see. What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur?

You mean like the cult-like reverence for the pseudo-intellectual issues commentary on Twitter and Medium? The people who have less than a decade in the industry but are experts on compensation, ocracies, power dynamics, and psychology? The ones who work at Silicon Valley startups and lecture the entire industry about how things work, then surround themselves with like-minded people to have strength in numbers? You a…

I see a lot of "two wrongs make a right" stuff here in rebuttals. The problem OP is pointing out is the cult like reverence for PG in this responders comments. Coming to his defense by pointing out that there are other authors on Medium and Twitter who also have a cult like reverence amongst their followers is a mis-direction at best. I think the point is non one deserves cult-like reverence. Maybe Ghandi but certainly no one sitting at the top of a money optimizing fountain.

I too was very uncomfortable when reading that paragraph. When I read comments like that I can see why it's possible that PG is starting to run into this recurring theme with the outside world. First it was a misunderstanding around founders with accents. Now it's a misunderstanding of women in technology. If he's becoming inadvertently surrounded with such adoring followers he's likely to find few of his assumptions challenged by such a receptive audience. He speaks, no one challenges him, he becomes emboldened. Then he speaks to a third party not under his spell and all heck breaks loose.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#547

Post by commandar »

rimantas wrote: post #471
Grokit wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose you wouldn't listen to Einstein when he was under 40 too, hmmm? There are numerous examples of younger, less experienced people being in the right while the older, more experienced are at fault because of one thing or another. Of course, this is the exception, not the rule. However, less experienced people often have an interesting take on things that more experienced people miss. When you're 35 you might b…

Did Einstein say something profound about social issues or people interactions when he was younger than 40? I don't say I agree that younger people have nothing of value to say in these areas, but I think you are mixing a bit different things there, experience in some field and life experience. And while age has some correlation with life experience it does not mean that someone older will be wiser at all.

>Did Einstein say something profound about social issues or people interactions when he was younger than 40?

Jefferson was 33 when he penned the Declaration of Independence. Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed when he was 39. Marx published The Communist Manifesto when he was 30.

Seriously, this list could go on for ages. Dismissing the perspective of youth is as indicative of an ignorance of history as youthful naivete.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#548

Post by ericd »

baudehlo wrote: post #526
ericd wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And was one of the first people to use probabilistic methods to fight spam, which is what finally made spam an almost non-issue.

For what it's worth, I wrote the code that did this in SpamAssassin just slightly before Pg published "A plan for spam". Although he had some very useful improvements to the algorithm which I rolled in.

Ha neat! Thanks for your part in the war on spam, we all owe you a debt of gratitude :-)

Re: What I Didn't Say

#549

Post by argumentum »

jusben1369 wrote: post #543
argumentum wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does YC being a "frat house" have to do with applying though? I can understand why that perception may discourage someone from participating in YC, but the acceptance rate is so low that it seems like premature optimization to think beyond the application.

Why would you apply for something when you've determined that you're not going to accept even if you get in? Also, it seems irrational to spend time completing a form when you know there's a very small chance you'd be accepted and even if you were you would decline it? If the chances were very high, say 80%, you could say "Well, I have no intention now but I'll apply anyways just in case circumstances change and I do…

Why would anyone make such a "determination" on hearsay that the clearly #1, gold-standard program is a "frat-house", promulgated at that by founders who were never part of that program?

The acceptance rate is now ~1%, so according to you nearly all those applying are irrational (the vast majority of even high quality applications will have a less than 80% chance).

The order just doesn't make any sense. Even the best students don't assume they are going to get into a particular dream school (MIT, Stanford etc), unless they are nuts. And those have about 5-10 times the accept rate of YC.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#550

Post by jayvanguard »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #284
mjburgess wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, he was mischaracterized and he replied. But jesus, > pg's response is actually priceless: it is like a soft-spoken witness upending a bullying lawyer who had just viciously attacked him, leaving the attacker reeling for all to see. What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur?

You mean like the cult-like reverence for the pseudo-intellectual issues commentary on Twitter and Medium? The people who have less than a decade in the industry but are experts on compensation, ocracies, power dynamics, and psychology? The ones who work at Silicon Valley startups and lecture the entire industry about how things work, then surround themselves with like-minded people to have strength in numbers? You a…

The first couple of years in industry you (generally) know you are a newb. It is that awkward 2-6 years of experience range where you a fair bit of experience but really you don't. You just aren't a newb.

People with high confidence in themselves often over estimate their experience around this time and look silly to anyone with actual experience.

I don't think 40 is some magical number. In fact many experiences that happened over 10 years ago in high tech starts to "fade" and become less relevant.

Post reply on HN