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

How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

elbowgreasegames.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#81

Post by neilv »

dang wrote: post #79
moomoo11 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just giving my opinion from what I see. In no way did I "slur" and my point isn't about YC but the founders.. you raise a valid point about survivorship bias I guess, but as of the last few years it seems a lot of rage bait and do anything to get signal instead of the positive optimism that I felt a lot of the companies offered those years ago. i guess what i'm trying to say is that it has become the final versio…

I appreciate this follow-up. There's another variable, which I think may be relevant: all of us who have been following YC for the past 10+ years are by definition 10+ years older than we were back then. Some people (edit: at least on internet forums) tend to get more jaded and cynical over time*. I mention this not to accuse you of more than your share of this, but because it's on my mind a lot about the HN communit…

I hope you find a good way to help HN be genuinely more optimistic.

Of course, right now, gloom is all over most of social media, and everywhere else, for understandable reasons of world reality (besides engagement manipulation/dynamics reasons).

And, within our field, a lot of the current enthusiasm and curiosity for tech news is for getting our economic tickets, in a tech gold rush that is not nearly as optimistic as the Web one was.

Will the optimism on HN come from topics that are interesting, but detached from all that threatens us, like a break or a reminder that there is still goodness and greatness?

Will it come from finding ways to correct or fight against what threatens humanity?

Will it come from tantalizing hints of personal advantage or opportunity to wind up on top?

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#82

Post by dang »

neilv wrote: post #81
dang wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate this follow-up. There's another variable, which I think may be relevant: all of us who have been following YC for the past 10+ years are by definition 10+ years older than we were back then. Some people (edit: at least on internet forums) tend to get more jaded and cynical over time*. I mention this not to accuse you of more than your share of this, but because it's on my mind a lot about the HN communit…

I hope you find a good way to help HN be genuinely more optimistic. Of course, right now, gloom is all over most of social media, and everywhere else, for understandable reasons of world reality (besides engagement manipulation/dynamics reasons). And, within our field, a lot of the current enthusiasm and curiosity for tech news is for getting our economic tickets, in a tech gold rush that is not nearly as optimistic…

I hope so too and I take your comment as encouragement in that direction!

Another question that's orbiting around this in my head is how do we explain to the community what we're looking for and why. Knowing HN, and the internet in general, I can imagine the backlash from certain segments of the commentariat ("Oh so we're only allowed to do happy talk now?" - "Once again the corporate overlords crack the whip" - etc. etc.)

On the other hand, I also know that other sizeable segments of the community have been tired of the cynicism here for a long time - so there will be positive repercussions too.

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#83

Post by conartist6 »

csa wrote: post #72
conartist6 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now that they're eliminating diversity in their investments are you still certain they will pick the next generation's winners? All they're investing in are AI companies... Once upon a time someone like me for whom engineering competence is a core aspect of my identity would have never considered turning my back on YC. But now I'm just embarrassed by them. The things they now think are the only things worth inves…

> All they're investing in are AI companies... Genuine question… Do you not think that a large percentage of (random cut off) $1b companies over the next 10 years will be AI? And/or do you not think that the next $100b+ company will be AI-centered?

Over the next 10 years, no, I think the market will course correct within that time frame. AI is the sauce that's being slathered on everything right now and demand for it is driving record valuations, particularly for AI startups and their founders. That demand is all investor-driven though: investors are falling over themselves to make AI investments, while consumers are not actually especially eager to have all human contact progressively stripped from their lives.

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#84

Post by rapidfl »

WhereIsTheTruth wrote: post #12
spacemarine1 wrote: post #2

Y Combinator forged a long-term, high-trust ecosystem to the benefit of all tech founders. The video games industry needs to do the same.

YC works because B2B can survive early with a few paying customers Gaming is pure B2C: hit driven, capital intensive, and unforgiving

That's a good point. Some of the (many) B2B companies in YC also get a decent start by selling to the other YC companies.

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#85

Post by csa »

conartist6 wrote: post #83
csa wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All they're investing in are AI companies... Genuine question… Do you not think that a large percentage of (random cut off) $1b companies over the next 10 years will be AI? And/or do you not think that the next $100b+ company will be AI-centered?

Over the next 10 years, no, I think the market will course correct within that time frame. AI is the sauce that's being slathered on everything right now and demand for it is driving record valuations, particularly for AI startups and their founders. That demand is all investor-driven though: investors are falling over themselves to make AI investments, while consumers are not actually especially eager to have all hu…

> That demand is all investor-driven though: investors are falling over themselves to make AI investments

Largely true.

> while consumers are not actually especially eager to have all human contact progressively stripped from their lives

Hmm… I agree with this sentiment, but I think it’s mostly a straw man. There are many things that AI can do well that people will end up embracing directly or indirectly.

Medical scans is one big one, imho.

Mundane but important legal services is another.

Skillful mediation of scutwork is definitely embraced.

Good and fast simple customer service via phone or text will end up being very welcome (at least in some contexts). I realize that most people will prefer superlative human customer service, but that’s currently not a widespread available reality, especially for simple tasks.

All sorts of learning (great and essentially free tutors).

All sorts of practice (e.g., language, speeches, debates, presentations, etc.).

All of the above (and more) are things that people are using AI for right now, and they seem to be loving it.

I realize that some folks use AI tools in regressive and sometimes dehumanizing ways, but that’s not the fault of the tool, imho.

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#86

Post by steele »

Given the argument around YC effectively "cancelling" naughty list founders. The John Wick Excommunicado poster for illustration is an interesting choice because John Wick is the hero of the series and is constantly being threatened by the institution that both created and emancipated him only to try to destroy him later. Not sure how intentional, but Reeves himself is beloved figure and often noted as a paragon of hard work and integrity in a grimy industry despite a reputation as a "bad actor".

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#87

Post by rfrey »

conartist6 wrote: post #45
seizethecheese wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VC math follows a power law and expects almost all investments to flop, and the one winner to pay for it all. The question here is not about the flops it’s: are the winners big enough?

And now that they're eliminating diversity in their investments are you still certain they will pick the next generation's winners? All they're investing in are AI companies... Once upon a time someone like me for whom engineering competence is a core aspect of my identity would have never considered turning my back on YC. But now I'm just embarrassed by them. The things they now think are the only things worth inves…

"Make something VCs wished people want"

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#88

Post by Espressosaurus »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #80
YetAnotherNick wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If you don't consider tens of millions of dollars in revenue a success, your definition of "success" is completely out of whack.

It’s not successful for a VC.

VCs are looking for the billion dollar exit. 10s of millions is 100-1000x off what they look for

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#89

Post by YetAnotherNick »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #80
YetAnotherNick wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If you don't consider tens of millions of dollars in revenue a success, your definition of "success" is completely out of whack.

Depends on development cost, no? If game development costs 10s to 100s of millions of dollars, 10 million in revenue is a failure.

Re: How Y Combinator made it smart to trust founders

#90

Post by Ozzie_osman »

intalentive wrote: post #41

This mirrors the military doctrine of "mission tactics" which entrusts subordinates with wide latitude in executing orders. But it requires a high degree of alignment and competence, which explains why YC focuses on founders over product or idea. This makes sense in a dynamic environment with sensitive local conditions and "network lag" in the chain of command. But in more static or settled market environments it may…

I'm a huge fan of Mission Command. If you want to read more, I'd recommend the Army's official doc on it: https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN34403-ADP_6-... (it's 110 pages but you really only need to read Chapter 1).

This was eye-opening. I used to think militaries were completely centralized and top-down, but a friend who was an officer explained this to me and pointed me to the literature. It was fascinating and educating to understand the principles behind Mission Command being successful as a method (competence, mutual trust, shared understanding, etc).

Post reply on HN