3 ms·

Follow up. Kinda bummed you didn't submit Tarsnap. I understand why some believe that projects like Pinboard or Tarsnap don't "fit the spirit" of Apply HN, and

Follow up. Kinda bummed you didn't submit Tarsnap. I understand why some believe that projects like Pinboard or Tarsnap don't "fit the spirit" of Apply HN, and that truly makes me sad. Software like Pinboard or Tarsnap should embody great "hacker" software, and the sort of software quality that YC companies aspire to build. The concept that these ideas are less "fund-able" because they don't have more attractive splash screens or because they haven't embraced growth hacking is a real shame.

cperciva 10y ago
It all depends on what the purpose of YC Fellowships is. If the purpose is "get a direct return on investment", Tarsnap and Pinboard are probably not good companies to accept. If the purpose is "gain information to improve future YC Core admission decisions", likewise. If the purpose is "bring interesting people together who will contribute to the YC community and help other YC-funded companies", then I think they should accept Tarsnap and Pinboard. But I don't think YC makes many mistakes, so I'm inclined to conclude that the third of those possible purposes is not why YC set up the Fellowship program.
- YuriNiyazov 10y ago
  I went back and reviewed the YC Fellowship thread and sama's AMA thread because I got curious about this. I would like to understand why you are reluctant to take investment. As I see it, there are two possible paths: 1) You take investment from YC, you become part of the community, you get advice, but your desire to remain King is respected. It seems to me that if this were the outcome, moving to the Bay Area for three months and incorporating in the US is a fair exchange. 2) You take investment from YC, you become part of the community, you get advice, AND there is now a perceptible push to make Tarsnap more like a "make-me-Rich" company rather than "keep-me-King" company: they keep on suggesting that you raise more money and start doing things that would increase the valuation of the company but that you would fundamentally disagree with, etc. etc. Certainly this would not seem like a fair exchange. IOW, what I am trying to ask you is this: is the fundamental reason why you are reluctant to apply to YC Core is that you are concerned that your desire to remain King will be challenged? Or is it something else entirely that I am not seeing? Because certainly incorporating in the US is a schlep, and finding housing in the Bay Area is a schlep, but I can't imagine those being the fundamental reasons for not applying to YC considering the benefits of the community, and getting a bunch of money from YC, if it comes with no strings attached (aside from the moving and incorporation mentioned above), can't be a bad thing, even if you don't need it.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    It's partly the king-not-rich bit; but it's also partly that I'm an irrationally patriotic Canadian. Canada is my home, and Canada is Tarsnap's home; my notion of success includes providing an example of a Canadian startup which was successful without moving to the bay area -- because Canada is sorely lacking such examples.
    - YuriNiyazov 10y ago
      That looks like a strangely self-limiting argument. No one in their right mind would argue that Canada can't produce a company that has global reach, but that consists of a founder that lives in Canada, and a UI programmer that lives in Romania. It doesn't seem to me that those are the examples that Canada is lacking. It seems perfectly reasonable, however, to argue that Canada doesn't have the investment ecosystem that is capable of creating a <insert your favorite company whose founders chose rich rather than King> on the same scale as the Bay Area - but it doesn't seem like that's the example you are trying to set anyway. Edit: remove Spotify example, as it's Swedish.
      - cperciva 10y ago
        Sorry, that was a bit incoherent; I was nearly asleep when I wrote it. Probably better to say that I'm pushing back against a pervasive notion that "you have to move to the USA if you want to succeed".

cperciva 10y ago

It all depends on what the purpose of YC Fellowships is. If the purpose is "get a direct return on investment", Tarsnap and Pinboard are probably not good companies to accept. If the purpose is "gain information to improve future YC Core admission decisions", likewise. If the purpose is "bring interesting people together who will contribute to the YC community and help other YC-funded companies", then I think they should accept Tarsnap and Pinboard. But I don't think YC makes many mistakes, so I'm inclined to conclude that the third of those possible purposes is not why YC set up the Fellowship program.

YuriNiyazov 10y ago
I went back and reviewed the YC Fellowship thread and sama's AMA thread because I got curious about this. I would like to understand why you are reluctant to take investment. As I see it, there are two possible paths: 1) You take investment from YC, you become part of the community, you get advice, but your desire to remain King is respected. It seems to me that if this were the outcome, moving to the Bay Area for three months and incorporating in the US is a fair exchange. 2) You take investment from YC, you become part of the community, you get advice, AND there is now a perceptible push to make Tarsnap more like a "make-me-Rich" company rather than "keep-me-King" company: they keep on suggesting that you raise more money and start doing things that would increase the valuation of the company but that you would fundamentally disagree with, etc. etc. Certainly this would not seem like a fair exchange. IOW, what I am trying to ask you is this: is the fundamental reason why you are reluctant to apply to YC Core is that you are concerned that your desire to remain King will be challenged? Or is it something else entirely that I am not seeing? Because certainly incorporating in the US is a schlep, and finding housing in the Bay Area is a schlep, but I can't imagine those being the fundamental reasons for not applying to YC considering the benefits of the community, and getting a bunch of money from YC, if it comes with no strings attached (aside from the moving and incorporation mentioned above), can't be a bad thing, even if you don't need it.
- cperciva 10y ago
  It's partly the king-not-rich bit; but it's also partly that I'm an irrationally patriotic Canadian. Canada is my home, and Canada is Tarsnap's home; my notion of success includes providing an example of a Canadian startup which was successful without moving to the bay area -- because Canada is sorely lacking such examples.
  - YuriNiyazov 10y ago
    That looks like a strangely self-limiting argument. No one in their right mind would argue that Canada can't produce a company that has global reach, but that consists of a founder that lives in Canada, and a UI programmer that lives in Romania. It doesn't seem to me that those are the examples that Canada is lacking. It seems perfectly reasonable, however, to argue that Canada doesn't have the investment ecosystem that is capable of creating a <insert your favorite company whose founders chose rich rather than King> on the same scale as the Bay Area - but it doesn't seem like that's the example you are trying to set anyway. Edit: remove Spotify example, as it's Swedish.
    - cperciva 10y ago
      Sorry, that was a bit incoherent; I was nearly asleep when I wrote it. Probably better to say that I'm pushing back against a pervasive notion that "you have to move to the USA if you want to succeed".