Virtualmin Founder Joe Cooper Explains Y Combinator to Slashdot Trolls(slashdot.org)
slashdot.org
Virtualmin Founder Joe Cooper Explains Y Combinator to Slashdot Trolls
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=234583&cid=19110535
2 comments
I'm fairly interested in these problems; they are directly relevant. So thanks for mentioning them :)
One interesting observation I've had: I've yet to encounter a YC funded company that has had a negative outcome from the YC program. I've talked to several in person and through email and its been nothing but positives.
I realize that its probably the successful ones who will be outspoken and positive, but still something worth noting.
The equity argument is plain stupid IMHO. I'm actually more curious with the trend that YC and its copies are creating with branding. It seems to be turning into a kind of "school" where its companies are identified as much by association with the program as the company's idea itself. So far this seems to be very good in generating publicity, but I am curious about the long term effects of this as there are more successfully funded companies and more copies pop up.
I realize that its probably the successful ones who will be outspoken and positive, but still something worth noting.
The equity argument is plain stupid IMHO. I'm actually more curious with the trend that YC and its copies are creating with branding. It seems to be turning into a kind of "school" where its companies are identified as much by association with the program as the company's idea itself. So far this seems to be very good in generating publicity, but I am curious about the long term effects of this as there are more successfully funded companies and more copies pop up.
The main objection of the "trolls" is the strident ideology being shown. Here's one of my replies buried in the other thread:
Anybody who build their business on nights and weekends while working a fulltime job is someone who has shown a great deal of commitment. I've done this, its damn hard... its hard not to let the startup wither away because you're too busy with your day job, and its hard not to loose interest after even 3 months of spending all your time on your job or your other job with little time for anything else.
Show me someone who built thier company that way, and I'll be interested in putting money in.
YC seems to attract and be geared for, kids in college who want a summer job with the prospect of glamorous VC money afterwards. It doesn't matter to them that they might get a raw deal-- cause they don't have much invested in it in the first place. And ther's nothing wrong with that.
The problem is that these kids are so adamant and smug that this is The One True Way To Do A Tech Startup-- that making these foolish short term choices in pursuit of a billion dollar dream is obviously right... and building a net worth of $10M by building a $3M/a year real buisiness is a "lifestyle" business-- a failure in their eyes. They are naieve and strident and there is no getting thru to them because Paul Graham has them mezmerized by the tune he's playing.
YC is a great summer camp for entreprenurial college students. But all the bashing of other ways of going about it that they do are so misguided... and the focus on only high risk, low probability business models seems misguided.
Anybody who build their business on nights and weekends while working a fulltime job is someone who has shown a great deal of commitment. I've done this, its damn hard... its hard not to let the startup wither away because you're too busy with your day job, and its hard not to loose interest after even 3 months of spending all your time on your job or your other job with little time for anything else.
Show me someone who built thier company that way, and I'll be interested in putting money in.
YC seems to attract and be geared for, kids in college who want a summer job with the prospect of glamorous VC money afterwards. It doesn't matter to them that they might get a raw deal-- cause they don't have much invested in it in the first place. And ther's nothing wrong with that.
The problem is that these kids are so adamant and smug that this is The One True Way To Do A Tech Startup-- that making these foolish short term choices in pursuit of a billion dollar dream is obviously right... and building a net worth of $10M by building a $3M/a year real buisiness is a "lifestyle" business-- a failure in their eyes. They are naieve and strident and there is no getting thru to them because Paul Graham has them mezmerized by the tune he's playing.
YC is a great summer camp for entreprenurial college students. But all the bashing of other ways of going about it that they do are so misguided... and the focus on only high risk, low probability business models seems misguided.
I stumbled across Y Combinator a couple of days ago after the story on slashdot. I must admit, it drew me in instantly. Being shacked up for 3 months developing an idea for a start up with little worry about living expenses is everyones dream isn't it?
I live in Australia and I have an idea for a startup (which, oddly enough, has to do with internet dating which I was delighted to see is mentioned in one of the library articles) but I will readily admit the neither I nor my co-founder have any idea where to start. I am due to finish my Engineering degree in November and currently work 4 days a week for a local Engineering firm. As you can imagine this doesn't leave a lot of time for development of my idea or research of how to go about a startup.
Given such circumstances, a program like Y Combinator seems like the knight in shinning amour to me and I'm sure to the "kids" you are talking about. Its not so much the cash they inject, its the guidance and readily available support they offer which to me seems almost invaluable.
I can therefore see why there are people preaching that Y Combinator is "The One True Way To Do A Tech Startup". While I myself am not quite ready to make that claim I can clearly see where the logic behind these remarks resides. Judging by your comments BitGeek, you clearly aren't a "kid" but someone who has some experience in this field. I envy you and have a lot of time for any alternate routes for a startup like mine you care to suggest. But for now, from a 22 year old kids perspective that has done only a little bit of research, Y Combinator definitely seems like the best road traveled for my startup to be a success.
All I have to do now is apply, fly to the USA and be accepted, simple huh?
I live in Australia and I have an idea for a startup (which, oddly enough, has to do with internet dating which I was delighted to see is mentioned in one of the library articles) but I will readily admit the neither I nor my co-founder have any idea where to start. I am due to finish my Engineering degree in November and currently work 4 days a week for a local Engineering firm. As you can imagine this doesn't leave a lot of time for development of my idea or research of how to go about a startup.
Given such circumstances, a program like Y Combinator seems like the knight in shinning amour to me and I'm sure to the "kids" you are talking about. Its not so much the cash they inject, its the guidance and readily available support they offer which to me seems almost invaluable.
I can therefore see why there are people preaching that Y Combinator is "The One True Way To Do A Tech Startup". While I myself am not quite ready to make that claim I can clearly see where the logic behind these remarks resides. Judging by your comments BitGeek, you clearly aren't a "kid" but someone who has some experience in this field. I envy you and have a lot of time for any alternate routes for a startup like mine you care to suggest. But for now, from a 22 year old kids perspective that has done only a little bit of research, Y Combinator definitely seems like the best road traveled for my startup to be a success.
All I have to do now is apply, fly to the USA and be accepted, simple huh?
All I have to do now is apply, fly to the USA and be accepted, simple huh?
Hey, I'm from Australia, went for an interview, and didn't get in. Its not that simple because of VISA issues...
The real point of this post is to get you email me, because you're in Australia :)
Hey, I'm from Australia, went for an interview, and didn't get in. Its not that simple because of VISA issues...
The real point of this post is to get you email me, because you're in Australia :)
I question your motives. You seem to just be enjoying the opportunity to play the role of the outspoken critic of The Cult of Paul Graham. You don't seem the least bit interested offering better alternatives for these "kids". All you say is "if you know what you're doing" it "isn't hard" to get funding. Paul Graham is giving personal guidance and introductions.
You're also taking the role of the experienced startup guy setting the "kids" straight. But people who are clearly more experienced and successful than you seem to disagree. Look at the list of speakers YC has attracted, many of them are not easy to influence with money -- and yet they seem to think YC is an amazing opportunity that they would have loved to have when starting out.
You're also taking the role of the experienced startup guy setting the "kids" straight. But people who are clearly more experienced and successful than you seem to disagree. Look at the list of speakers YC has attracted, many of them are not easy to influence with money -- and yet they seem to think YC is an amazing opportunity that they would have loved to have when starting out.
I don't have a quesiton of yours. I know just what your motives are. You're kissing ass, and you've been doing it as long as I've been here.
Ironically, I don't find much that I dislike about Paul Graham. But the cult of PG is another matter.
If you read my posts you will find that I always provide an alternative solution and generally argue for why it is a better solution. Dont' get VC funding- you don't need it, you can lease the infrastrcture you need, and use open source tools. I even quoted PG saying essentialyl the same thing-- yet this position is the number one thing that people argue with me about here.
I do find it curious that the primary argument made against me is the fallacy of authority: "But people who are clearly more experienced and successful than you seem to disagree."
I am not making any arguments based on my success, and you certainly don't know my level of success or lack of it. But you sure seem to think you do.
":and yet they seem to think YC is an amazing opportunity that they would have loved to have when starting out."
The thing that most makes this community cult-like is the constant reliance of repeated ideology. The third time you hear the same "Argument" you start to wonder if everyone isn't reading from the same textbook. (And this text book seems to be full of appeals to authority.)
And the worst thing is that there's an ideology here!
Why does it have to be combative? Why does anyone who provies a different opinion need to be attacked or percieved as attacking?
You start off by impunging my motives... but I am more tame than Paul Graham is. Do you question the motives of his essays simply because he's not tame? Again, colored perception.
"clearly more experienced and successful than you"
You know, I think that's the core of it-- Paul had a mild success, and he's written a lot of opinionated articles. The cult of personality is therefore one that worships success... I haven't bragged about my success, I've argued without appeal to authority. But that carries less weight, doesn't it?
Ironically, I don't find much that I dislike about Paul Graham. But the cult of PG is another matter.
If you read my posts you will find that I always provide an alternative solution and generally argue for why it is a better solution. Dont' get VC funding- you don't need it, you can lease the infrastrcture you need, and use open source tools. I even quoted PG saying essentialyl the same thing-- yet this position is the number one thing that people argue with me about here.
I do find it curious that the primary argument made against me is the fallacy of authority: "But people who are clearly more experienced and successful than you seem to disagree."
I am not making any arguments based on my success, and you certainly don't know my level of success or lack of it. But you sure seem to think you do.
":and yet they seem to think YC is an amazing opportunity that they would have loved to have when starting out."
The thing that most makes this community cult-like is the constant reliance of repeated ideology. The third time you hear the same "Argument" you start to wonder if everyone isn't reading from the same textbook. (And this text book seems to be full of appeals to authority.)
And the worst thing is that there's an ideology here!
Why does it have to be combative? Why does anyone who provies a different opinion need to be attacked or percieved as attacking?
You start off by impunging my motives... but I am more tame than Paul Graham is. Do you question the motives of his essays simply because he's not tame? Again, colored perception.
"clearly more experienced and successful than you"
You know, I think that's the core of it-- Paul had a mild success, and he's written a lot of opinionated articles. The cult of personality is therefore one that worships success... I haven't bragged about my success, I've argued without appeal to authority. But that carries less weight, doesn't it?
Anyone who respects anyone can be said to be "kissing ass" when they say so. Perhaps it would interest you to know that I have no intention of ever applying to YC or anything similar. I'm fairly impartial I just happen to completely disagree with your opinion and tone.
You did try to list your credentials in the Reddit thread IIRC. And I'm not judging your success and experience against Paul Graham's -- I'm judging it against Paul Graham, Joe Kraus, Evan Williams, Mitch Kapor, Mark Fletcher, Joshua Schacter, Paul Buchheit, etc. All of these people have practically endorsed YC as a Good Thing(TM) and have supported it by meeting with the founders and giving them advice.
You're asking why it feels "combative" and yet your posts basically say that anyone who thinks YC is a good deal is an inexperience make-money-fast cult zombie kid. Surprised?
You'd get a lot more positive response if you went a bit easier on the insulting language and condescension. I don't think that's what you're after though. I think you're enjoying being the outspoken contrarian too much. Enjoy.
You did try to list your credentials in the Reddit thread IIRC. And I'm not judging your success and experience against Paul Graham's -- I'm judging it against Paul Graham, Joe Kraus, Evan Williams, Mitch Kapor, Mark Fletcher, Joshua Schacter, Paul Buchheit, etc. All of these people have practically endorsed YC as a Good Thing(TM) and have supported it by meeting with the founders and giving them advice.
You're asking why it feels "combative" and yet your posts basically say that anyone who thinks YC is a good deal is an inexperience make-money-fast cult zombie kid. Surprised?
You'd get a lot more positive response if you went a bit easier on the insulting language and condescension. I don't think that's what you're after though. I think you're enjoying being the outspoken contrarian too much. Enjoy.
I've never posted to reddit. I think you're confusing me with someone else completely.
You are still trying to make a fallacious argument from authority, and are attempting to insult me for not doing the same?
I'm making my points, and if you will notice, I'm generally rather generous with the person I'm disagreeing with. Unfortunately this is not sufficient, as simply having a differnet opinion is the problem here, and the result is that people make insinuations on the persons character because they have a differnet opinion-- as I called you on and as you have not yet withdrawn, despite being more conciliatory in this message.
Or put another way- the problem is people are offended at someone having a differnet opinion.
You are still trying to make a fallacious argument from authority, and are attempting to insult me for not doing the same?
I'm making my points, and if you will notice, I'm generally rather generous with the person I'm disagreeing with. Unfortunately this is not sufficient, as simply having a differnet opinion is the problem here, and the result is that people make insinuations on the persons character because they have a differnet opinion-- as I called you on and as you have not yet withdrawn, despite being more conciliatory in this message.
Or put another way- the problem is people are offended at someone having a differnet opinion.
Success stories are the only empirical data we have. Please share yours.
That's cult-of-personality thinking. It invovles the fallacious argument "appeal to authority".
If I told you I was Tony Robbins and I was a multi-millionaire., would that sway you? I doubt it because, despite being someone who has been successful at business, he's likely not going to garner respect.
You should evaluated arguments-- technological or not-- on their logic, reason and scientific basis. And this is why those are the only kind of arguments I will make.
The counter arguments, however, tend to be naming "Authorities"... rathre than making logical or reasoned arguments.
If I told you I was Tony Robbins and I was a multi-millionaire., would that sway you? I doubt it because, despite being someone who has been successful at business, he's likely not going to garner respect.
You should evaluated arguments-- technological or not-- on their logic, reason and scientific basis. And this is why those are the only kind of arguments I will make.
The counter arguments, however, tend to be naming "Authorities"... rathre than making logical or reasoned arguments.
There are too many variables for me to evaluate your statements based on pure logic. If I could simply reason my way to a successful business plan I wouldn't need advice. I need a scientific basis, which involves experimenting and recording results. This is not a cult of personality; it's a cult of results.
undoudtedly pg is getting better and better at spotting the entrepreneurs who are most likely to benefit from YC and who are receptive to the environment for making something big.
In doing so pg is definately making something YC funded companies want and appreciate. Hence the positive feedback. I love how fearless these startups are in going after big big markets, its insrpirational to susequent generations of YC founder.
May there be more black T shirts dished out soon.
In doing so pg is definately making something YC funded companies want and appreciate. Hence the positive feedback. I love how fearless these startups are in going after big big markets, its insrpirational to susequent generations of YC founder.
May there be more black T shirts dished out soon.
On the flip side there are more and more applicants which counterbalances the improved selection. Also it's unlikely that anyone who got accepted would give a negative review of it because it's valuable even if it doesn't "work out".
With sites like http://overhear.us the phrase "they can't all be winners" springs to mind; however, I have a hard time believing they were more promising than the hundreds who got turned down. I'm not sold on the prophetic ability of YC.
With sites like http://overhear.us the phrase "they can't all be winners" springs to mind; however, I have a hard time believing they were more promising than the hundreds who got turned down. I'm not sold on the prophetic ability of YC.
YC and pg do not even try to push the image of having prophetic ability. He repeats over and over that there are great ideas, business models, and people that are not selected.
I got interviewed for this summer. While I am disappointed that we were not selected, I understand that there's a bunch of great people, with great ideas, and only a handful of spots. When you're trying to pick the best 19 apples from a barrel of 420 apples, you're bound to throw out a couple good ones.
My question is, how many people that were not YC selected went on their own, and now are successful? same question but with people that were interviewed and not selected?
I got interviewed for this summer. While I am disappointed that we were not selected, I understand that there's a bunch of great people, with great ideas, and only a handful of spots. When you're trying to pick the best 19 apples from a barrel of 420 apples, you're bound to throw out a couple good ones.
My question is, how many people that were not YC selected went on their own, and now are successful? same question but with people that were interviewed and not selected?
I might buy that if he didn't write an article right after the last round justifying nonselection of people as "measurement error" between those at the tail end of the talent cutoff. http://paulgraham.com/judgement.html
My question is how many of the start-ups selected wouldn't have done anything if they hadn't made the cut? I think most of the non-selectees switch gears and do something else instead, like school.
Relatedly, how many of the people who were selected had success primarily because of their YC link rather than because of impressive technology? Reddit certainly seems to be one of them, and the "big success" so far.
My question is how many of the start-ups selected wouldn't have done anything if they hadn't made the cut? I think most of the non-selectees switch gears and do something else instead, like school.
Relatedly, how many of the people who were selected had success primarily because of their YC link rather than because of impressive technology? Reddit certainly seems to be one of them, and the "big success" so far.
I think it's usefulness over technology. I'd wager that chances of any of the YC funded startups are outsmarting entire departments in the behemoth companies, technology-wise, are close to nothing.
I'd say it's like the restaurant business. There are many cooks out there, but not all can make a nice shop with the right ambience, right furniture, etc.
I'd say it's like the restaurant business. There are many cooks out there, but not all can make a nice shop with the right ambience, right furniture, etc.
Very insightful!
Interviewed for this summer but not selected.
I have no idea if we will be successful or not.. I know for certain though that we will keep trying until we are (which may be never). My co-founder is my cousin, so he isnt exactly going away :) He's keeps my fire lit and I do the same for him.
My biggest fear is not being able to move as fast as if we were in the YC program. I think YC is a gentle push to release as soon as possible, which is important. I suspect many of the early-stage teams who are rejected do not actually execute their idea and release. (Hence the apparent absence of successful "rejected" groups maybe?)
I have no idea if we will be successful or not.. I know for certain though that we will keep trying until we are (which may be never). My co-founder is my cousin, so he isnt exactly going away :) He's keeps my fire lit and I do the same for him.
My biggest fear is not being able to move as fast as if we were in the YC program. I think YC is a gentle push to release as soon as possible, which is important. I suspect many of the early-stage teams who are rejected do not actually execute their idea and release. (Hence the apparent absence of successful "rejected" groups maybe?)
Its totaly in your control... move on, stop hanging out around the YC crowd and go build your company. Don't let YC determine your fate... they had their chance and passed.
The absense of successful rejected is simply a factor of the YC propaganda engine only talking about those accepted. ITs too early for stories about the ones that got away to be well known-- hell, there aren't any real successes from the program yet (which is also because its new.)
The absense of successful rejected is simply a factor of the YC propaganda engine only talking about those accepted. ITs too early for stories about the ones that got away to be well known-- hell, there aren't any real successes from the program yet (which is also because its new.)
Overhear.us is an example of YC funding smart people, rather than any particular idea. Paul and Evan are smart and really good at what they do (development and design, respectively).
I agree that they may not have hit on the right idea for their skills yet (overhear.us is fun as hell to use and eats time like nothing else I've ever used, but it doesn't seem to be getting traction, so far), but I have no doubt they will build something great. They may end up going back to the drawing board (maybe even a few times) before doing it...but you'll hear about them again. They're still young...plenty of time to make a few mistakes before hitting on something great.
YC is a very early stage investor. They bet on people more than ideas. I believe betting on Paul and Evan was a well-placed bet, even if Socialmoth and Overhear.us never explode into popularity.
I agree that they may not have hit on the right idea for their skills yet (overhear.us is fun as hell to use and eats time like nothing else I've ever used, but it doesn't seem to be getting traction, so far), but I have no doubt they will build something great. They may end up going back to the drawing board (maybe even a few times) before doing it...but you'll hear about them again. They're still young...plenty of time to make a few mistakes before hitting on something great.
YC is a very early stage investor. They bet on people more than ideas. I believe betting on Paul and Evan was a well-placed bet, even if Socialmoth and Overhear.us never explode into popularity.
Very well said. That site is a lot of fun to use... People who think they are prophetic regarding consumer internet ideas are kidding themselves. The only way to know whether an idea will work or not is to just go ahead and TRY IT. And Paul/Evan have already done this twice in such a small amount of time. That speed and taste for great execution is what YC's bet is.
thanks for the call out and link : )
overhear.us is extremely experimental at this point and could change dramatically. we spent 6 weeks and made it on a whim and it has already proved useful as a feedback device internal to YC.
there remain a lot of obvious improvements to be made product, but it is an experiment. right now we are eyeing it and seeing how people are using it, and how we can get them to use it better.
i'd love to talk more about it, but i have a feeling i'm already being pulled in to an online war by responding to this comment.
overhear.us is extremely experimental at this point and could change dramatically. we spent 6 weeks and made it on a whim and it has already proved useful as a feedback device internal to YC.
there remain a lot of obvious improvements to be made product, but it is an experiment. right now we are eyeing it and seeing how people are using it, and how we can get them to use it better.
i'd love to talk more about it, but i have a feeling i'm already being pulled in to an online war by responding to this comment.
oops
-paul from overhear.us
i'd love to write up the whole overhear.us story but i don't think this is the place.
also this isn't my normal account
-paul from overhear.us
i'd love to write up the whole overhear.us story but i don't think this is the place.
also this isn't my normal account
I'd like to see the stats on overhear.us but my feeling is that a corporate backchannel can be a compelling timesink.
This link to my post on Slashdot is better rated than all but one of my submissions to News.YC. I guess that's why Staunch is in the "leaders" and I'm in the ghetto with ~100 points. Staunch has an eye for a good story, and I don't, even when I wrote it.
Steven Levy is utterly ignored when he posts on Slashdot (he replied to my post, and got no votes). I find that shocking. The Slashdot I knew and loved would have really appreciated a visit from the author of "Hackers". He's not some hack writer slumming in the tech department on his way to politics or sports...he's Steven-Fucking-Levy. Folks ought to show some respect. I'm not wishing for an automatic +5 from fan-boys (ala Bruce Perens), but it'd be nice to see some evidence that the idiots aren't running the asylum over there in Slashland.
Finally, my post elicited a +5 Interesting, but got no replies (other than Steven's response, and a troll). Sure, I'm all giddy about the magnificent impact on my karma (Excellent-Excellent...I feel validated), but I'd rather hear what folks have to say. I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that everyone wants to post to only the latest stories.
I miss being able to vote on everything. Sure, I get moderator points over on Slashdot pretty frequently (Karma==Excellent!), but never when I really want to smack someone down or approve something.
Why does any of this matter? I dunno.