721–730 of 768 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should do it in Stockholm, we have produced more unicorns per capita than any other city in the world: http://techcrunch.com/2016/01/26/sweden-is-a-tech-superstar-...
Why should "per capita" matter to YC?
Mr. Altman, can you tell us about your morning routine?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EDIT: i should emphasize this is only my experience as a startup hiring manager. maybe YC attracts nothing but geniuses, i dunno. i'm just a guy on the internet. since yc is obviously not going to talk shit on their own applicants, i'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that it's just like every other job application process when six figures (or more) of money is on the line. big paychecks attract plenty of, sh…
> the easy thing is the dipshits and fakers are easy to spot-and-drop almost immediately. You seem pretty sure about this. How would you validate that belief? What are the consequences if you're wrong? > i can basically glance at a resume and disqualify it in 10-15 seconds if it's not good enough. I'd suggest taking a more systematic approach. You may be rejecting some great candidates without decreasing the likeliho…
The thing about saying no is that it's a lot less risky than saying yes, in terms of damage potential, not necessarily in terms of "lost upside" (which IMO is something that rarely merits consideration). If you pass on a good candidate, they will move on and find another home that works for them; no harm, no foul, so one doesn't need to feel bad about admitting that the person is skilled, but just not a good fit.
If you bring someone on board and they turn out bad, they can and often do cause substantial harm to the company/org. Once they're there, they have access to everything they need to wreak havoc, and as I'm sure you know, malicious intentions unfortunately aren't really necessary to cause problems. Big issues for your company can be caused by simple incompetence.
Joel Spolsky discusses this in his essay on interviewing [0]. It's just much safer to let the candidates that aren't enthusiastic yesses go than take a gamble and lose.
>Also, why you no use capitalization? It makes your post read dumb.
I don't really mind this, but I do think this is noteworthy since he specifically called out spelling and grammatical errors as disqualifiers. I assume in reality, he's forgiving of personal quirks or typos, and means that he rejects candidates out of hand who appear genuinely unable to spell or properly utilize much of the industry's vernacular.
[0] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/GuerrillaInterviewing...
Hey Sam: So I've been working diligently for the last few weeks putting the final edits on my application to YC. I'm 68 years old an the only founder. On the positive side I've got almost 50 years of work in the project that defines the state of the art. Am I wasting my time in applying considering my age and singleness?
With that in mind, what's the point of asking the question? There's nothing to be gained by asking, and potentially something to be lost (displaying lack of confidence).
For my part, I've had "entrepreneurial spasms" as a solo founder and it's been a terrible idea for me. This is because I'm a terrible procrastinator. I need a schedule-oriented person to keep me in check / act as the rudder to my "powerful engine".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EDIT: i should emphasize this is only my experience as a startup hiring manager. maybe YC attracts nothing but geniuses, i dunno. i'm just a guy on the internet. since yc is obviously not going to talk shit on their own applicants, i'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that it's just like every other job application process when six figures (or more) of money is on the line. big paychecks attract plenty of, sh…
Oh wow. I wish they said that the bar was so low. I would like to apply as well if that's the case. Edit: I still think the idea of Dropbox is pretty stupid and I wouldn't have given Drew Houston a penny if I was an investor. But I never thought the average application would be so far worse if Dropbox got funded and succeeded.
The short version is that there is an inverse relationship between actual and perceived skill. In general, the better someone is at something, the less they rate themselves relative to their peers.
This is a big problem when recruiting people for skilled positions. The best applicants assume that they won't be good enough and don't apply. The newest applicants have no reservations about applying and assume that they are qualified for anything, kind of like someone who graduates with a BS in CompSci and thinks it means he knows everything about being a professional programmer before he's even ever held a real programming position.
Joel Spolsky discusses this too! I can't seem to find the post right now, though. The gist is that he was encouraging good developers to apply to Fog Creek, because he noticed that a lot of developers he would have liked to hire were intimidated about applying there, as he had previously discussed things like dismissing non-amazing candidates, how rare it is for good people to be on the market, and the extensive perks his company extended to its developers (like an office with a door that shuts). The good people read these posts and automatically filtered themselves out, no doubt comparing against their idealized version of what they'd like themselves to be, emphasizing the gaps and flaws that they know are in their resume, instead of the reality of the applicant field, the competence of which most good people grossly overestimate.
There's another cheesy colloquialism that I think encompasses this well: "you're comparing your behind-the-scenes with everyone else's highlight reel". We use ourselves as the reference point for understanding others, but the intimacy we have with our own thoughts and failings can cause us to forget that they're not as big as they seem. We should be cautious before allowing ourselves to be intimidated by others, bearing in mind that we only see a small snippet of the picture.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But how to create stealth took some darned good "ideas". Sure, the startup "circles" regard an idea as a short description of a sentence or two to a family member, neighbor, or prospective user/customer of how the new product/service will look to them. But, then what about how to make that product/service work? Ignore that? That part should be crucial: Crucial for having the first good or a much better product/soluti…
I am firmly on your side in regards ideas, but I think the problem is we are not all meaning the same thing by what is an idea. If your idea is crap (uber for x) then the only thing that matters is execution. If your idea is good then it is very valuable independent of execution. My favourite pure good idea with enormous value has to be the Kelly criterion [1]. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
I'm trying to figure out why I didn't know this.
Hey Sam! We're disrupting a $3.2B information market, full of old slow tech. We've received encouragement from YC alum to apply and had help with our application, but warned that what we're doing might be too difficult for the average tech person to grasp and be vetted out for this reason. We have 11k in revenue from our first sales cycle and 200% mom user growth. Any recommendations on how we can make sure we get he…
Typo here: Smart Company the is easiest way to keep on top of scientific progress and research-based products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's actually much less than I would've expected.
Every HN reader is an above decent potential founder or at the very least potential product starter/inventor/maker... That is 310,000 potential companies. I do not see anywhere else you could have that many of the same profile.
"Every HN reader is an above decent potential founder or at the very least potential product starter/inventor/maker."
This whole thread has been inspiring and educational. Thanks for your comment, it was a perfect motivation to start the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am firmly on your side in regards ideas, but I think the problem is we are not all meaning the same thing by what is an idea. If your idea is crap (uber for x) then the only thing that matters is execution. If your idea is good then it is very valuable independent of execution. My favourite pure good idea with enormous value has to be the Kelly criterion [1]. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
Ok, I didn't know about this. Thanks! How did you learn about it? I'm trying to figure out why I didn't know this.
The Kelly criterion seems to not be well known - why I can't say other than there are a lot of groups that benefit from people being ignorant of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want to finish what I started first. I think I owe that to them
I think that's a good attitude -- to a point. Wait until the right moment, okay, but don't give up your own dreams completely. I think you should go ahead and tell your founders about your aspirations. They may very well be supportive; I've definitely read that many YC founders encourage their employees to do their own startups. Telling them will give you and them a chance to work out a plan for what you should get d…
I don't know about the specific case, but a 4-year old startup should have enough cash to spend a little in a small seed capital.