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

Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

readwrite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 101 posts

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#61

Post by marbletiles »

pg wrote: post #56
rexreed wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don't want to second-guess your judgement, I've seen many other articles that are just as much rehashes and not shut down as dupes. Why does this article deserve the axe so quickly? Indeed, if it is saying something different from the other articles (as odious as it might be), wouldn't that indicate it is not a dupe?

This article is dupe + linkbait. Most mere dupes don't get upvoted, so there's no need to kill them.

Either trust what the upvotes tell you, even when you disagree, or manually curate the front page. We can eat your cake, or you can have it.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#62

Post by neya »

pg wrote: post #40

I'm going to kill this article as a dupe. It's just other articles rewritten in more colorful language. But it's giving this thing too much credit even to call it a dupe, because in the process of making the language more colorful, he's now describing something that is definitely not the case. The other articles are talking about a trend that's happening as slowly as global warming. No door has suddenly crashed down,…

Ok, may I humbly ask you as to what's wrong with Dan accusing of start-ups like Gourmet which add no value/solve very little problems? (For your Reference: Gourmet is to find gourmet food and have it shipped across the country to your doorstep, started by a couple of Standfords)

>Dan Lyons has no evidence of it himself.

Dan Lyons needs no special evidence. The evidence are the shitty start-ups that don't solve any real problems you come across everyday, promoting their launches on TechCrunch (and on others). He is just talking about this painful trend, I hate to say this, but, which is noticeable within YCombinator itself(no offence), off-late.

Great Start-ups look like bad ideas initially, but when they remain as bad ideas forever, its an entirely different story, which is what Dan is talking about, too, I believe.

with great respect, may I ask you, why did you have to kill this article? (I feel you are abusing your power) Why not let others know of this painful trend?? I'm not asking for my personal benefit, I'm just curious, it's a genuinely heart-felt written article.

Sincerely,

Neya

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#63

Post by tptacek »

bicknergseng wrote: post #54
pg wrote: post #40

I'm going to kill this article as a dupe. It's just other articles rewritten in more colorful language. But it's giving this thing too much credit even to call it a dupe, because in the process of making the language more colorful, he's now describing something that is definitely not the case. The other articles are talking about a trend that's happening as slowly as global warming. No door has suddenly crashed down,…

You need the smell of rotten eggs to know there's a gas leak.

The problem is, the smell of rotten eggs usually just means you need to take the garbage out.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#64

Post by _dps »

marbletiles wrote: post #61
pg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article is dupe + linkbait. Most mere dupes don't get upvoted, so there's no need to kill them.

Either trust what the upvotes tell you, even when you disagree, or manually curate the front page. We can eat your cake, or you can have it.

> Either trust what the upvotes tell you, even when you disagree, or manually curate ...

Why the harsh dichotomy? Surely one can believe upvotes to be a good filtering method on average while still accepting that occasionally they do a poor job and require some intervention?

(Note: not taking a position on the article itself, but rather the practice of manual intervention)

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#65

Post by tptacek »

neya wrote: post #62
pg wrote: post #40

I'm going to kill this article as a dupe. It's just other articles rewritten in more colorful language. But it's giving this thing too much credit even to call it a dupe, because in the process of making the language more colorful, he's now describing something that is definitely not the case. The other articles are talking about a trend that's happening as slowly as global warming. No door has suddenly crashed down,…

Ok, may I humbly ask you as to what's wrong with Dan accusing of start-ups like Gourmet which add no value/solve very little problems? (For your Reference: Gourmet is to find gourmet food and have it shipped across the country to your doorstep, started by a couple of Standfords) >Dan Lyons has no evidence of it himself. Dan Lyons needs no special evidence. The evidence are the shitty start-ups that don't solve any re…

First, the fact that you were able to comment on the story means he didn't kill it.

Second, there have always, always, always been weak startups. Lots of them.

Third, anyone can cite one or three facts to construct an argument. But when you do that carelessly, all you end up with is a fallacious syllogism. In Lyon's case, A, B, and C seem to add up to "go back to engineering school".

The same thing happened with your comment here. You look at the evidence and suggest that the problem is a phenomenon that prevents weak startups from becoming good startups. But that's not the problem either; weak startups have never tended to become good startups organically, so it's hard to make a case for the availability of seed funding retarding progress.

Finally, it's not a genuinely heart-felt written article. It's a deeply cynical attempt to capture pageviews by someone with only a peripheral connection to startup entrepreneurship.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#66

Post by bovik »

I have no doubt that pg doesn't like the article Here's a quote "...smart young people have been conned into thinking that starting a company is akin to buying a lottery ticket or rolling dice at Las Vegas -- the odds are long but you never know, you might get lucky and strike it rich. So make something up, throw it out there, and see what hapens."

That's describing 99% of bullshit yc stratups. The 1% (or less) which succeed would have done so with or without yc. And they mostly actually involve real business models of charging for a product/service.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#67

Post by marbletiles »

_dps wrote: post #64
marbletiles wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either trust what the upvotes tell you, even when you disagree, or manually curate the front page. We can eat your cake, or you can have it.

> Either trust what the upvotes tell you, even when you disagree, or manually curate ... Why the harsh dichotomy? Surely one can believe upvotes to be a good filtering method on average while still accepting that occasionally they do a poor job and require some intervention? (Note: not taking a position on the article itself, but rather the practice of manual intervention)

One can believe that, but it's different saying that "sometimes spam and dupes slip through" and saying "I disagree with everyone else, they're wrong, I'm right", which is what he's doing in this case.

It's as if he visited a user page for someone he didn't like, saw 5000 karma and said "yeah, but his posts are mostly fluff. I'm making that 3500".

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#68

Post by ryanx435 »

pg wrote: post #40

I'm going to kill this article as a dupe. It's just other articles rewritten in more colorful language. But it's giving this thing too much credit even to call it a dupe, because in the process of making the language more colorful, he's now describing something that is definitely not the case. The other articles are talking about a trend that's happening as slowly as global warming. No door has suddenly crashed down,…

note: typing on a smart.phone sucks balls.

ha ha! I knew you would have commented on this article and tried to debase it even before I opened the comment section! it seems to me that the entire business of YC relies on there being a market for the exact type of start ups that this article describes as a waste of human talent. It is in your (pg's) best interest to kill this article because if there is a bubble, and it pops, YC will be a major loser. Your credibility would be destroyed because YC would be seen as a primary finder of companies.that.have no long term.value. . YC needs a liquid market of shitty start ups to get vc funding in order to function. I'm sure you are aware that even the tinyest hint of.trouble.can pop bubbles, which is.why you purged this.article.

I laughed at your decision to kill the article for a couple of reasons. first, this means that you are aware of the bubble and also aware that in order to prevent new companies from being discouraged from applying to YC you need a zero tolerance policy on even the hint of it showing its ugly head. by banning this article you have confirmed to me that there is a bubble and it is about ready to pop. second, this says a lot about your character and your priorities as a person. you are ok with draconian anti free flow of information banning if an idea goes against your personal interests. for.someone who funds tech start ups, you seem.to.have forgotten.how.the internet works. the Truth will get out. supposedly the voting system.of.hackernews should have prevented a false idea from.getting.to.the front page. if this idea was truly as false as you say it is in your reasons to ban it, it never would have been upvoted. and yet you had to ban it. third, this means that you truly don't give a shit about the.companies or the people that you fund. you know that it the.bubble.is.close.to.popping and.that.it may not be in their best long term interests to apply to YC, but you want their talent anyways so you can profit, so you continue.to cultivate the idea that their stupid business idea is not a problem as.long.as.they pivot.enough.times to.find a similiar, slightly less stupid idea to try to sell to Google or.whoever.

I've been thinking about it for a while, but your response to this.article has confirmed.to.me that I will.never apply to YC. You are not a person who I would want to take advice.from, let alone have any say over.my.life. or how I run my business. I wish you luck, though, and I hope.you can continue to find enough chumps.to.apply to.YC so you can continue.to.fund hackernews.and I can read interesting articles.for.free... so thanks.for.that, anyways.

edit: I know you (pg) won't respond, and I know you will probably shadow ban my account, and I know this comment will be downvoted into oblivion. I also know that you, pg, will read.it and know that I see through your bullshit. and if I can see it, so can others.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#69

Post by bovik »

"Ok, may I humbly ask..."

"with great respect, may I ask you.."

"With all due respect PG..."

"While I don't want to second-guess your judgement..."

And these are the comments disagreeing with pg ! Wow. Either internet ain't what it used to be or there's a lot of hero worship going on here.

Come on my fearless conquerors of the Internet. Stand up for yourselves. Show some spine. You're not going to create the next billion dollar business with that sort of genuflecting attitude.

Re: Let's All Shed Tears For The Crappy Startups That Can't Raise Any More Money

#70

Post by bicknergseng »

tptacek wrote: post #63
bicknergseng wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need the smell of rotten eggs to know there's a gas leak.

The problem is, the smell of rotten eggs usually just means you need to take the garbage out.

Either way bears discussion about the smell, like pg pointed out and has allowed on this post. It seems to me like a lot of the comments are more focused on how to improve rather than jumping on the end is nigh train.
Post reply on HN