4 ms·
I'd love to do this for my next startup (in Seattle and/or Berlin; maybe an Asia location too). It's the most efficient way to work. I've done it with Sealand
by rdl 11y ago
I'd love to do this for my next startup (in Seattle and/or Berlin; maybe an Asia location too). It's the most efficient way to work. I've done it with Sealand/HavenCo and in war zones, but not recently elsewhere.
It's unsustainable when startup isn't the primary (or, basically only) thing in your life, but there are a few potential solutions:
0) Be flexible. The biggest bar to this is probably people with families/kids (which I personally hope to never have, but I respect that some people, including great employees/founders/etc., do and deeply value having family interactions) -- do whatever is possible to address this. It's probably not a one size fits all solution. "Live on site 2-3 days/week, wfh otherwise" might actually be preferable to a lot of people with families than spending 1-2h/day commuting and 8-12h/day working 5 days/week.
1) Duration limited (say, a startup from 0 to 10-15 employees and $20mm/yr revenue -- could be 1-3y). Even if the duration is long (3y), having a specific time where it will change as the default helps.
2) People who are inherently suited to this (which probably works well for, say, early career security people; not as well for civil engineers.)
3) Intermittent -- work/live like this for months at a time, then go back "home".
4) High budget: live/work like this AND have enough money to have a "regular" house/apartment elsewhere, or at least go on great vacations.
5) Deep mission at the startup: "save the world from spy agencies", yes. "Build a more efficient billing system for other startups", probably not.
6) Strongly prioritize "no assholes rule" in hiring. (The worst thing about having one coddled asshole is then everyone else feels the need to equivalently act like an asshole to be taken seriously; it's self perpetuating)
7) Have an obvious physical reason for being in the same place -- easier to co-live in a remote location building a dam, than it is to co-live in an office park in Kentucky to build billing software.
- napoleond 11y ago> which probably works well for, say, early career security people; not as well for civil engineers Just curious: why do you think this would be less likely to work well for civil engineers?
- rdl 11y agoIt may be selection bias of the ones I've met, but they seem older/families/more traditional, vs. early-career security people. That might be because a lot of the civil engineers I've met have been government employees.