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

Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 168 posts

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#61

Post by gatherhunterer »

yaacov wrote: post #58
georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

I think that they are trying to ride a wave of sentiment. You can see a similar strategy in their political coverage that causes them to do some weird things, like dismissing the accusations against Justin Fairfax. They have good writers on staff but I have found that more incisively factual coverage of major stories can always be found in The Washington Post.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#62

Post by csallen »

yaacov wrote: post #58
georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

The media has a lot to lose in a tech-dominated world.

They used to have a monopoly on reach. Readers came to directly to them. Today that role belongs largely to tech companies. Media companies are heavily dependent on the algorithms and whims of the likes of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon. And it's not just distribution: it's their business models, too. Apple taking a cut of NYC subscription revenue, Amazon doing similar things through its Kindle devices, Facebook and Google ads, etc.

This would be an existentially terrifying position for any business to be in. And as much as the media likes to portray itself as putting truth-seeking and objectivity first, it's still very much a collection of self-interested profit-seeking businesses.

When you're the media and you're faced with this situation, what do you do? What weapon do you have? Your content of course.

It doesn't need to amount to full-scale propaganda or anything obvious. You simply hire writers and editors who are themselves anti-tech, and results will follow. Even if you don't hire that way as a media organization, your employees' incentives are aligned such that they should naturally lean anti-tech, given the realities of the business situation and its effect on their jobs.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#63

Post by krn »

chrisweekly wrote: post #57
krn wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think as far as credentials go, it's pretty simple: (market capitalization of the company) * (the level of responsibility given at the company). The smaller the company is, the higher the position has to be to make the credentials stand out. For instance, being a recent graduate at FAANG is probably more or less equal to being a pre-A series startup CTO, if there are no other entries in the CV.

I didn't downvote, but I take issue w/ the example you cite. In terms of credentials & signalling, recent grads taking jr software engineer / entry-level positions in FAANG are not comparable to startup founders. That said, at more senior levels, your model fits more closely. A mid-level Alphabet product manager is likely to have been a founder or C-level exec in a startup or two.

> not comparable to startup founders.

I was referring to early stage startup founders, which are very likely to fail in the first 12-18 months. After a startup receives VC funding or becomes profitable, of course the credentials of its founders stand above the entry-level positions at FAANG. Otherwise, they might just signal a lack of fair judgement.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#64

Post by chii »

40acres wrote: post #10

This is the cycle of Silicon Valley at play, and an example why despite the Exodus of many entrepreneurs and engineers SV is still the leader in software based start ups. Take the "PayPal mafia" for instance, out of one successful company spawned others -- SpaceX, LinkedIn, Facebook (via investment cash). These companies will spawn others, so on and so forth. It's a cycle that feeds upon itself and has been a success…

> It's a cycle that feeds upon itself and has been a successful model

you just don't hear about the failures out there. I bet there's much more failures than there are successes.

If it weren't, banks would've all lent out money to startups!

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#65

Post by Rafuino »

georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

YC is not typical. It provides you a pre-built network, so if you're not going this route, who you know already makes a huge difference.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#66

Post by yaacov »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #52
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m genuinely curious what you think we should do about getting stuck in local optimums? Allowing buildings to be 2x the height means, lower home prices in general but also the oldest owners have the worst views/property prices in the neighborhood. So optimizing locally, people should not want more homes built. Meanwhile, 2x taller buildings mean, 2x the people can sleep at night and work in the morning boosting the…

One person’s progress and innovation is another person’s theft or deprivation of value and enjoyment. Provide economic incentives for upzoning, and if the community doesn’t bite (which is their right), move on. Electrification of mobility and transport makes the environmental argument a moot point. Disclaimer: I live in suburbia.

> Electrification of mobility and transport makes the environmental argument a moot point.

I disagree. Electric cars are more efficient than IC, but they still use electricity which mostly comes from fossil fuels. Add in all the massively increased infrastructure spending and emissions per capita that are needed for suburbs, and urbanization is a no-brainer from an environmental perspective.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#67

Post by Judgmentality »

Rafuino wrote: post #65
georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

YC is not typical. It provides you a pre-built network, so if you're not going this route, who you know already makes a huge difference.

But anyone can apply to YC, and I believe the application process is almost entirely meritocratic.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#68

Post by jacques_chester »

yaacov wrote: post #58
georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

> New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years.

Let's be real. Tech has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#69

Post by jacques_chester »

csallen wrote: post #62
yaacov wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

The media has a lot to lose in a tech-dominated world. They used to have a monopoly on reach. Readers came to directly to them. Today that role belongs largely to tech companies. Media companies are heavily dependent on the algorithms and whims of the likes of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon. And it's not just distribution: it's their business models, too. Apple taking a cut of NYC subscription revenue,…

Most newspapers have a clear division between the editorial and money-making parts.

Journalists look down on the advertising and classifieds departments. The consider it beneath their worthiness. If you think they're hiring because they give a shit about the lowlies who pay to keep the lights on, you haven't worked in the trade.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#70

Post by toomuchtodo »

yaacov wrote: post #66
toomuchtodo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One person’s progress and innovation is another person’s theft or deprivation of value and enjoyment. Provide economic incentives for upzoning, and if the community doesn’t bite (which is their right), move on. Electrification of mobility and transport makes the environmental argument a moot point. Disclaimer: I live in suburbia.

> Electrification of mobility and transport makes the environmental argument a moot point. I disagree. Electric cars are more efficient than IC, but they still use electricity which mostly comes from fossil fuels. Add in all the massively increased infrastructure spending and emissions per capita that are needed for suburbs, and urbanization is a no-brainer from an environmental perspective.

A million EVs are sold every six months, and the time to sell a million EVs is shortening. Hundreds of GWs of renewables come online each year.

Urbanization is like nuclear power, financially and politically untenable. It is not a reasonable path to success.

Post reply on HN