5 ms·

Not really -- we didn't know the Facebook team all that well. Your argument would make more sense if we had sold to Google, but even then it would be false. If

by paul 17y ago

Not really -- we didn't know the Facebook team all that well. Your argument would make more sense if we had sold to Google, but even then it would be false. If your point is that people can build future success on top of past success, yes obviously that is true, but there is nothing wrong with that. It means that you need to work at it for a while and not expect people to simply hand you whatever you want because of some imagined "merit". Edit (because there's not reply link for some reason): Where do you think reputation comes from? You have to start by doing something, and over time if you keep doing things that makes you more valuable.

marshallp 17y ago
Well it's not exactly "Create something remarkable and people with money will find you." then. More like 'create something remarkable and have enough reputation or schmoozing ability, and be in the right geograhic area'. Even the 'remarkable' thing is not entirely true. I don't think facebook or microsoft were remarkable, for example, they just hit the right combination of luck and skill at execution. Google on the other hand, was an example of something remarkable when it first appeared.
- andreyf 17y ago
  I'm tempted to thow out the over-quoted "luck favors the prepapred mind". Yes, Microsoft lucked out when Bill Gates' mom was a boardmember of IBM, but they certainly took full advantage of it, and their many other opportunities - most of which came with having a more accurate understanding of their market than others. What might seem like luck to the inexperienced mind is usually a well executed strategy in line with a superior model. All in all, though, I think it wise to hold yourself responsible for your accomplishments - both geographic location and your circle of acquaintances is something you have significant control over.
  - marshallp 17y ago
    I don't think you can attribute Bill Gates to superior understanding and execution, at 50/100 million or even 500 million, but getting to 100 billion at one point, I don't buy it. Is Bill Gates really that much smarter than the rest of us. The same can be said for most people that's over 10 million I reckon. "All in all, though, I think it wise to hold yourself responsible for your accomplishments - both geographic location and your circle of acquaintances is something you have significant control over." I agree in spirit, but the reality is different. Yes. -if you're a white/asian male -born to middle class parents -and you're parents emphasized education -and good nutrition/genes so that you grow to above average height -and that you go to a good college -and can fit in with the right crowd yes, you simply move to silicon valley/manhattan/london and fit right in. IF you're a black man from a poor single parent family in small town mississippi, or the daughter of a farmer from a village in bangladesh, things are much more difficult.
    - andreyf 17y ago
      If you really want to make the big bucks, what you really need is a monopoly on the desktop operating system. But the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 and 2, and Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 25, are real bitches. That's how Bill Gates made $100B. He had an opportunity to monopolize desktop OS'es and the luck/insight to bet they would one day be worth a lot, and the skills to execute on that opportunity. Yes, that kind of opportunity is very rare, but $1-100M opportunities are not. That said, I agree with everything else you said - I agree that I'd much more like to live in a world where a black person with a poor single parent in a small town in Mississippi is given the tools to take advantage of the same opportunities as a Kennedy, but we should also accept that although it's something to strive for, and something to take steps towards (affirmative action/universal education/healthcare), there are also aspects which make it impossible. Ironically, one step towards equality is the removal of the meme "I was born <this and that>, so I can never accomplish what Bill Gates did".
- nostrademons 17y ago
  Reputation comes from doing remarkable - or even just impressive - things repeatedly over time. It compounds. The first time you hear that somebody just wrote something cool, you think "oh, that was nifty", and promptly forget about it a day later. The second time you hear it, you think, "Don't I remember hearing his name somewhere?" The third time, you think "Hmm, maybe I should watch out for this guy." By the fourth or fifth time, if you have money you want to invest it in him, and if you don't you want to work with him. I've met a bunch of rich people, and in my experience, they're all basically the same as normal people. They're impressed by similar things. So think about the people you find impressive, and try to be like them.
- jayliew 17y ago
  I detest the subtle jab at FriendFeed. Seriously, what are you going to say next? That the world is not fair? Only the 'remarkable' by your standards should see market success? That is wrong to get lucky, to be at the right place and right time?
  - marshallp 17y ago
    are you some kind of friendfeed fanboy it's a fair and legitimate point that it's easier for already famous people to get their company acquired than it is for a nobody it's naive to thinks it all about remarkable products, or even luck, politics comes into it
    - pg 17y ago
      What's naive is to think that Mark Zuckerberg would pay $50 million for something unless he actually wanted it that much.
      - marshallp 17y ago
        Well theoretically, the low level people on the acquiring team could be bribed by the acquired, as is often the case in governmnet contracts. edit: and you can 'dazzle' the acquirers with your reputation and nudge things along. Even if that hurts your reputation in the future, you can be making this as a last ditch cash grab. Kind out of taking out a mortgage and fleeing the country - or the 2000 tech boom and the current housing crisis
    - jayliew 17y ago
      it's a fair and legitimate point that it's easier for already famous people to get their company acquired than it is for a nobody <-- you are pointing out the obvious. And your point? It's naive to think that only products remarkable by your standards should see success in the market place. It's another thing to be jealous of the success of others, because the world is not a zero sum game. I'm done with this pissing match, I think I already said too much - say whatever you want, but your subtle attack on Friendfeed is malicious and I do not agree.

by paul 17y ago

marshallp 17y ago

Well it's not exactly "Create something remarkable and people with money will find you." then. More like 'create something remarkable and have enough reputation or schmoozing ability, and be in the right geograhic area'. Even the 'remarkable' thing is not entirely true. I don't think facebook or microsoft were remarkable, for example, they just hit the right combination of luck and skill at execution. Google on the other hand, was an example of something remarkable when it first appeared.

andreyf 17y ago
I'm tempted to thow out the over-quoted "luck favors the prepapred mind". Yes, Microsoft lucked out when Bill Gates' mom was a boardmember of IBM, but they certainly took full advantage of it, and their many other opportunities - most of which came with having a more accurate understanding of their market than others. What might seem like luck to the inexperienced mind is usually a well executed strategy in line with a superior model. All in all, though, I think it wise to hold yourself responsible for your accomplishments - both geographic location and your circle of acquaintances is something you have significant control over.
- marshallp 17y ago
  I don't think you can attribute Bill Gates to superior understanding and execution, at 50/100 million or even 500 million, but getting to 100 billion at one point, I don't buy it. Is Bill Gates really that much smarter than the rest of us. The same can be said for most people that's over 10 million I reckon. "All in all, though, I think it wise to hold yourself responsible for your accomplishments - both geographic location and your circle of acquaintances is something you have significant control over." I agree in spirit, but the reality is different. Yes. -if you're a white/asian male -born to middle class parents -and you're parents emphasized education -and good nutrition/genes so that you grow to above average height -and that you go to a good college -and can fit in with the right crowd yes, you simply move to silicon valley/manhattan/london and fit right in. IF you're a black man from a poor single parent family in small town mississippi, or the daughter of a farmer from a village in bangladesh, things are much more difficult.
  - andreyf 17y ago
    If you really want to make the big bucks, what you really need is a monopoly on the desktop operating system. But the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 and 2, and Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 25, are real bitches. That's how Bill Gates made $100B. He had an opportunity to monopolize desktop OS'es and the luck/insight to bet they would one day be worth a lot, and the skills to execute on that opportunity. Yes, that kind of opportunity is very rare, but $1-100M opportunities are not. That said, I agree with everything else you said - I agree that I'd much more like to live in a world where a black person with a poor single parent in a small town in Mississippi is given the tools to take advantage of the same opportunities as a Kennedy, but we should also accept that although it's something to strive for, and something to take steps towards (affirmative action/universal education/healthcare), there are also aspects which make it impossible. Ironically, one step towards equality is the removal of the meme "I was born <this and that>, so I can never accomplish what Bill Gates did".
nostrademons 17y ago
Reputation comes from doing remarkable - or even just impressive - things repeatedly over time. It compounds. The first time you hear that somebody just wrote something cool, you think "oh, that was nifty", and promptly forget about it a day later. The second time you hear it, you think, "Don't I remember hearing his name somewhere?" The third time, you think "Hmm, maybe I should watch out for this guy." By the fourth or fifth time, if you have money you want to invest it in him, and if you don't you want to work with him. I've met a bunch of rich people, and in my experience, they're all basically the same as normal people. They're impressed by similar things. So think about the people you find impressive, and try to be like them.
jayliew 17y ago
I detest the subtle jab at FriendFeed. Seriously, what are you going to say next? That the world is not fair? Only the 'remarkable' by your standards should see market success? That is wrong to get lucky, to be at the right place and right time?
- marshallp 17y ago
  are you some kind of friendfeed fanboy it's a fair and legitimate point that it's easier for already famous people to get their company acquired than it is for a nobody it's naive to thinks it all about remarkable products, or even luck, politics comes into it
  - pg 17y ago
    What's naive is to think that Mark Zuckerberg would pay $50 million for something unless he actually wanted it that much.
    - marshallp 17y ago
      Well theoretically, the low level people on the acquiring team could be bribed by the acquired, as is often the case in governmnet contracts. edit: and you can 'dazzle' the acquirers with your reputation and nudge things along. Even if that hurts your reputation in the future, you can be making this as a last ditch cash grab. Kind out of taking out a mortgage and fleeing the country - or the 2000 tech boom and the current housing crisis
  - jayliew 17y ago
    it's a fair and legitimate point that it's easier for already famous people to get their company acquired than it is for a nobody <-- you are pointing out the obvious. And your point? It's naive to think that only products remarkable by your standards should see success in the market place. It's another thing to be jealous of the success of others, because the world is not a zero sum game. I'm done with this pissing match, I think I already said too much - say whatever you want, but your subtle attack on Friendfeed is malicious and I do not agree.