Live data from Hacker News

How to Start Google

paulgraham.com

591–600 of 681 posts

Re: How to Start Google

#591
post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This optimizes for Paul's outcomes not for the individual outcomes. I don't get your comment. Are you saying PG is trying to deter and throw off teenagers so they don't compete in the space he invested in?

No, they're saying 1000 bets on random foundational technology means PG is more likely to have a startup to invest in that's a winner, then necessarily giving good advice to the individual founder who doesn't have 1000 turns at the wheel.

The founder who tries to do something boring and profitable ends up doing things like making another CRM or some kind of SaaS pipeline from one thing to another. These tend to be things that get built anyway by the people with more funding. There's so many CRMs built on top of vtiger open source, and these may be better than vtiger for a while, but in the long run they fall behind.

Paradoxically, avoiding risks makes people more likely to take the riskier options.

Re: How to Start Google

#592
post #527

> Don't try to guess whether gene editing or LLMs or rockets will turn out to be the most valuable technology to know about. No one can predict that. Just work on whatever interests you the most. This optimizes for Paul's outcomes not for the individual outcomes.

Becoming among the best in the world at one or an intersection of things is an excellent individual outcome, and one way to do that is to work hard on what interests you.

You can certainly become the best in the world at some combination of things that don’t interest you, but that seems less fun.

Re: How to Start Google

#593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advice about university is extremely dangerous in 2024 for anyone without a privileged upbringing because university is a far inferior place to learn things than YouTube videos aggregating all the best university lectures in history with the even more effective education style pioneered by Grant with 3blue1brown. I was replying to this. I don’t find this “offensive”, I find it misleading and untrue. Maybe some ti…

This remains a bundling of two levers that we at one time tangentially related, but have sharply diverged: learning difficult topics in a deep and time-efficient way, and building a potent network. It's all but universally acknowledged that technology represents the highest-leverage tool in the arsenal of getting things done in a leveraged way and this includes learning difficult topics in a time-efficient way. The b…

It's all but universally acknowledged that technology represents the highest-leverage tool in the arsenal of getting things done in a leveraged way and this includes learning difficult topics in a time-efficient way.

This isn't an argument. Not everyone wants to stare at a computer for 15 hours a day. Maybe you do. Some people prefer in-person interaction and discussion, others don't.

Yes, in 1-to-1 comparisons, a YouTube video about a topic may be better than a university lecture in which you are mute and can't interact with the professor. But university isn't just mutely watching less qualified professors give lectures. Lectures are but a small part of the entire university experience, which also includes: learning how to work with others, discussion groups, office hours with the professor, managing your time to complete tasks, building social skills, dating, on and on. It's a complete package. The key element is that you are immersed in this environment and interact with the community of people around you. A university is not merely a place that stores information. When you attend a quality university, all of these things are a part of the learning experience. They are not separate.

To use myself as an example: I have a degree in philosophy from one of the higher-ranking programs in the world. The Internet and YouTube are full of lectures and podcasts and free books about philosophy. And yet – none of them comes even close to the experience of sitting in a room for 3 hours intensely discussing metaphysics, or logic, or Kant, or another complex philosophical topic with a small group of other students and professors. That doesn't happen on the Internet and no amount of innovative video formats is going to change it. When you directly interact with another human being face-to-face and discuss/critique ideas, (in my experience) you learn much better than just watching videos. There is a huge difference between someone that has merely read a lot of books on a topic, and someone that has been through a rigorous discussion and critique with qualified interlocutors.

Finally, on the networking element: if you look at most of the actual top performers in the tech industry, they all have one thing in common: they know each other. Learning how to interact with people – and not merely acquiring information – is a key element of actually being successful. And that's still learning. It's not some nebulous hand-wavy thing that you can brush away. Building the next Google, which is what the original essay was about, necessarily requires you to build and navigate complex human social structures. It's not something you can just watch in a video. Merely having information in your head isn't actually that useful if your goal is build a company.

Re: How to Start Google

#594
post #162

The blindness to privilege that’s tied up in the part about why you ‘need’ to go to a good (by which he means highly selective) school… > if you want to start a startup you should try to get into the best university you can, because that's where the best cofounders are... > The empirical evidence is clear on this. If you look at where the largest numbers of successful startups come from, it's pretty much the same as…

In "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America" Barbara Ehrenreich poses that universities are (in my words) merely a fictional moat, "invented" by the new class that became rich through education and work, rather then before through ownership and capital. "Education" nor "work" can be passed through generations. If I am a very gifted lawyer, this is not something I can pass on to my daughters or suns (but a ca…

On rereading my notes: the book by Ehrenreich is "fear of falling".

Re: How to Start Google

#595
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America" Barbara Ehrenreich poses that universities are (in my words) merely a fictional moat, "invented" by the new class that became rich through education and work, rather then before through ownership and capital. "Education" nor "work" can be passed through generations. If I am a very gifted lawyer, this is not something I can pass on to my daughters or suns (but a ca…

I like your poetic metaphor of sons as bright stars ...

English isn't my native tongue. Sometimes stupid mistakes slip through. Apparently this one sounds like a metaphor. It was just a mistake, though.

Re: How to Start Google

#596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true if you require the same amount of income to maintain your lifestyle, but if you've been working in tech for 20 years, you have savings. I'm not in my 40s yet, but it's much more viable for me to take a risk now than it was when I was just starting out because I can afford to fail for a couple years without, you know, becoming homeless.

This so much. I'm 36 and I can afford to not work for many years with my savings. It's definitely easier now for me.

While I also consider myself lucky, not everyone works as a software engineer earning high salaries. Being older also (usually) means more responsibilities and less tolerance for risk.

Re: How to Start Google

#597
post #36

I know people mention that this advice smacks of survivorship bias, and I think that's pretty obviously going to be a part of any advice given about economic outcomes whose odds of working out are perhaps a whole order of magnitude better than lottery tickets I think it's more important to note how talks like this use "children" as an excuse to present a very sanitized version of the history being discussed. I think…

The best advice to give children is that they should be born to rich, influential and well-connected parents. That will give them a huge advantage in all walks of life including if they want to start a startup. Larry and Sergei had the benefit of rich, influential and well-connected parents, as did Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Paul Graham himself.

I think the place where this is most apparent in the speech is the bit about selective universities. It's interesting the way people like Graham talk about how universities work, because they're actually kind of the primary place where a particular sleight of hand happens. Every very wealthy person I've ever met believes wealth and intelligence to be tightly coupled. Some will even talk about these things as though they're completely equivalent.

Universities kind of double down on this equivalence in some ways, as they are the de facto credentialing system for the job market, although there's some evidence that this is for the first time in quite a while becoming less true in some sectors, it's still a huge part of the reality of how social mobility is gated.

So when Graham frames the role of "selective" universities in the success of various famous startups, he's totally right that they're excellent places to network. But his conception of their selectivity is pretty strange. It's pretty well-understood by now that a lot of mechanisms can get people into great schools via the wealth and influence of their parents rather than "smarts and determination". I once read someone who pointed out that bringing in a few "scholarship" kids who are less well off makes it seem like anyone could get in with the right grades and test scores, and the incentive is to have just enough of these to ambiguate who is there for what reasons. To launder the "wealthy, well-connected" with some "smart, determined" cred. It's telling therefore that he leaves out one of the most important parts of the networking value of universities: They're a great place to meet funders, and the top tier universities also have significant resources to facilitate student projects that may turn into companies, compared to other institutions

Re: How to Start Google

#598
post #527

> Don't try to guess whether gene editing or LLMs or rockets will turn out to be the most valuable technology to know about. No one can predict that. Just work on whatever interests you the most. This optimizes for Paul's outcomes not for the individual outcomes.

I wonder: what better advice, that optimizes for individual outcomes, would you offer founders-to-be instead?

Re: How to Start Google

#599

1. Get into Stanford just as Stanford is getting into the VC business. 2. Use Stanford bandwidth for your web crawler. 3. See how AltaVista does it; they're in downtown Palo Alto. 4. Get 100K from the guy who founded Sun. 5. Move into the space above the bike shop in Palo Alto. (9 major startups began there.) 6. Get more funding from the guy who founded Amazon. 7. Sell search ads. 8. Profit!

Which step is:

"Build a search engine so good all nerds on the early Internet abandon AltaVista and switch to it, no marketing required."?

Re: How to Start Google

#600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting rich and making the world better are not incompatible, or even unaligned in general. You get rich by offering a good or service that society desires.

Drug lords are making the world better?

Isn't Cannabis now a socially accepted and provided good in much of the Western world?
Post reply on HN