that's what a lot of people say, but I think it's more of an excuse/laziness around explaining the actual problem. any entrepreneur who raises a series A will be managed by his investors. if he is not the CEO he will be managed by the CEO and the investors/board.
I didn't intend it to be about money. I also said that entrepreneurs want a 1% shot at ruling the world (king vs. rich). It's really about perception of control and perception of fairness around hard work.
No worries. I didn't mean to sound harsh in my tone. I thought your comment was a snap judgement without any real research. If you did do research you would know that I don't do all of the teaching, we bring in experts from every location, just like a conference.
Mark was actually only there for the China part which was four days including weekend. He's actually highly interested in the business climate there and wants his kids to learn mandarin.
"It means the probability of a startup making it really big is not merely not a constant fraction of the probability that it will succeed, but that the startups with a high probability of the former will seem to have a disproportionately low probability of the latter."
The "not merely not" phrase here is a little confusing. What PG is saying is that the probability of it succeeding is inversely related to the probability of it being a big success?
The space is not trying to be like GA, ie. classes aren't the point. It's trying to curate the best hacker and design talent into a common community. From my experience at Dogpatch Labs in NYC, free is extremely effective at getting the best people.