3 ms·
You mean maybe the accelerator? It would be awesome if YC/the accelerator had a bootcamp of 1-3 days talking about this stuff. Because, let's face it, this "fin
by mildbow 11y ago
You mean maybe the accelerator? It would be awesome if YC/the accelerator had a bootcamp of 1-3 days talking about this stuff. Because, let's face it, this "finance stuff" is complicated and most of us don't have a clue: it's not intuitive or something that can be reasoned from first principles. Anyway, are we supposed to build product or become focused on learning all this new jargon(is this fake work?) ? Seems like a lot to duplicated effort if the latter is the case. So, it should make sense for YC to have a short bootcamp.
So why wont they? Because maybe it will open them up for liability? I hope that's wrong because they obviously see the need for such a thing, but are too risk averse(?) to provide value there.
Anyway, why are most of sam's post about how stuff sucks/his disappointment as opposed to: this sucks, and here's how we want to try fixing it? He's running the accelerator and this lack of ownership is really hurting the brand.
Sigh. I'm going to get shadowbanned again. What am I saying that's so disagreeable?
- dang 11y agoI think you might be misapprehending Sam's posts. Demo Day just finished and he's advising startups by warning them about pitfalls. YC has a tradition of making these kinds of posts public—pg used to publish his advice to YC startups in the form of essays for anyone. I always thought that was great. (Off topic: I've been inspired by it to (slowly) write some advice for YC startups about what counts as good content for Hacker News, and when it's ready, will make that public too.) As for what's disagreeable in what you said, let's look at your paragraphs: (1) 100% fine; (2) assumes its conclusion and makes an unfair jab; (3) mischaracterizes Sam's posts on the whole, as well as the recent ones; (4) off-topic posturing about bannage.
- mildbow 11y agoThanks for acknowledging/replying. Regarding your specific complaints: (2)Assuming conclusion and using that to open up discussion is a fairly standard rhetorical practice. Are you saying that that paragraph doesn't move the discussion forward? Why is it unfair? It's an assumption/leading for sure, but it's as fair as anything else. 3) Ok. So here's the thing: when you put things out on the internet, other people read it. They especially read it when it's the top link on HN :). And, they read the content not the intent. Mischaracterization isn't something I'm trying to do malignantly: but unless I'm missing something recent posts have been very much in the vein of "here's what I don't like" rather than "here's how we are fixing some thing we don't like". Maybe I'm still being unfair? But when these posts are up for consumption for the world, the cop-out that it was only meant for the YC class seems a bit silly. Is seeing that opinion voiced really worth the effort of silencing it? Are only "positive" (fawning) posts the ones that are allowed? 4) Are you saying I'm not shadow/hellbanned?
- dang 11y agoYou're not banned. If you want to discuss these other details further we can do so offline (hn@ycombinator.com).