11 ms·

> The problem I find (and one I've seen in a lot of cofounder groups) is that most of the people who want to start startups are visionaries. It's simpler than

by rsp1984 10y ago

> The problem I find (and one I've seen in a lot of cofounder groups) is that most of the people who want to start startups are visionaries. It's simpler than that. Most people just prefer slacking off to working their butts off. However it's the narcissists and sociopaths that will call their slacking off being "visionary" while the good guys either just leave or start working their butts off as everybody else. Obviously you want to pick your cofounder(s) among the latter kind.

nxzero 10y ago
Working your butt off has zero to do with having a executable vision that creates value. Clearly shit needs to get done, but there's only so many hours in the a life of a startup and being able to see what needs to be done ultimately is more important than just getting stuff done. __ "I choose a lazy person to do a hard job. Because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it." - Bill Gates
- amorphid 10y ago
  I do not agree. A person who doesn't work their butt off usually lacks any sort of meaningful perspective derived from hard work.
  - nxzero 10y ago
    "A shortcut is not shortcut, unless you know the way." - nxzero Finding shortcuts does not require hard work, but a willingness to be different and take risks others will not.
    - amorphid 10y ago
      "Someone else already knows the trade secret for the problem I'm trying to solve, but they won't tell me the solution, because I don't have lots of money. Even if they did tell me, I probably wouldn't understand it, because I lack the perspective of experience." -amorphid "I have no idea in which direction I need to go, so I'm gonna have to work my butt off to find the right path." -amorphid "I worked really hard, and found a solution!" -amorphid
- rsp1984 10y ago
  Oh, I agree that a startup needs an executable vision. However if someone provides just the vision but doesn't put as much work in as everybody else that's an advisory role, not a co-founder role, and should be reflected in the equity distribution. The thing is that vision is just so much easier than actually doing the grinding grunt work. "Vision without execution is hallucination" - Thomas Edison
  - nxzero 10y ago
    Disagree. I've literally run a startup where I took an opportunity I saw, pitched it to a cofounder, got a single client, cofounder did all the work. After year, cofounder was tried of doing work, so I told them how to turn the service into a product and rapidly got five clients; after that, the cofounder didn't have to do anymore work either. I'm not lazy, happy to do hard work, but if I see an exploitable situation I will not create work just to feel good about things. Do exactly what needs to be done, nothing less, nothing more. Footnote: Not a fan of Edison, he in fact was lazy, refused to change, and spent a good deal of his life literally pounding rock to no end.
    - leesalminen 10y ago
      Why would you exploit your cofounder into performing a disproportionate amount of work?
      - nxzero 10y ago
        I didn't exploit the cofounder, I presented them with an opportunity, they were fully aware of the situation. In fact, they were excited about the project, enjoyed the work, and often bragged about it to our friends. Beyond that, after I told him how to turn the service into a product, I turn something that without me would have had no value after they stopped into something that produced value for years without any major effort from either of us. EDIT: Truly curious as to the reasoning behind the downvotes and would welcome a comment expressing someone's thoughts on why this comment has received 3+ downvotes.
- brahmwg 10y ago
  I get what you're saying, and i think the whole "you gotta work your butt off to be successful" thing is a lingering noting from workoholic culture. "How many hours you put in?" is the corporate version of "how much can you lift?" And I believe it's not exactly right; working smarter is better than just working harder. But both do entail work. Then again, isn't there some quote about inspiration and perspiration ;)
  - hvo 10y ago
    Well, here is this about Bill Gates coding 18hrs a day in his first job. http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/10/bill-gates-first-real-job/409084/ http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/10/bill-gates-first-re...
    - krmboya 10y ago
      Very interesting. Perhaps if he'd managed to skip undergraduate studies straight to graduate school as adviced he'd be wrestling with hard enough problems not to think about writing programs for the upcoming PCs of the era
  - jomamaxx 10y ago
    "you gotta work your butt off to be successful" thing is a lingering noting from workaholic culture. " Completely false. There are very, very few startups that are successful wherein the founders are not putting in crazy hours.
- jomamaxx 10y ago
  "Working your butt off has zero to do with having a executable vision that creates value." Except that 'working your butt of has everything to do with actually executing that vision' Google, FB, Apple, MS - founders 100% of these companies worked really, really hard to get there. Bill Gates was notorious for pushing his people to extremes.
- sharemywin 10y ago
  The thing you missing is leadership. People won't bust there ass off over and above what they are paid for a lazy person that looks to exploit them. But, if you can work your ass off and have a vision people want to follow with a whole lot of luck you might create something special.
tdb7893 10y ago
I'm not sure I would go that far but I have always had very mediocre experiences with people who describe themselves as "visionary"
- api 10y ago
  Visionary is something other people might call you after you earn it. Beware of anyone who toots their own horn like that.
- Silhouette 10y ago
  I don't know about the word "visionary" or using it as some sort of self-descriptive label, but I do think it's important for the founders investing their time and effort into a startup to have a vision for what they're really trying to achieve and to dream big. That's obviously not sufficient for success, but I suspect that to some extent it is necessary, given the commitment that tends to be needed from founders and perhaps early employees and how difficult it can be to ride out the rough patches without some sort of goal you believe will be worth it in the end.
- rdtsc 10y ago
  That's my heuristic -- those who call themselves "visionaries", "architects" or "coding ninjas" are usually those you have to stay away from.
  - Amygaz 10y ago
    I agree with you. And I also have a tendency, based on a few personal experiences, to associate self-proclaimed visionaries, with narcissistic personality disorder. And it is also my experience that, besides being very active in taking credits for other people ideas, design and work, they are typically lazy and a hindrance. However, somehow, they're alway seems to be able to find people who will do the job for them, from bench work to CEO work, so they can call themselves successful.
    - jomamaxx 10y ago
      There is definitely such a thing as 'architecture' role in software. Usually they have a lot of experience, and work on larger teams where such things are necessary.
kordless 10y ago
> Most people just prefer slacking off to working their butts off. Representing the individual desire to work for "most people" isn't your job or your right any more than it's my right to say your internal view of the world is totally fucked up if you think that way. It's all well and fine to mention there are sociopaths in the industry, but colluding them with narcissists is unreasonable. Narcissism is simply the ability to externalize one's internal viewpoints in a way that tend to spread that same viewpoint to other's internal views, often at times without empathy for those who it infects. If that benefits the company, whose function is to make everyone there more money, then narcissism may a required trait of the company's leader. If someone can't accept that for themselves, then they should leave the company or never join to begin with. The whole sociopath matter is another thing entirely. Sociopaths can be untrustworthy, which makes dealing with them problematic.
- jomamaxx 10y ago
  I think it's safe to say most people would rather slack off than work extremely hard. Sometimes, rarely, people have a strong sense of purpose, or a very high level of professionalism. But 95% of people, if they could chose to take a big salary - AND - chill and not do much, probably would.
  - kordless 10y ago
    Somebody worked their asses off to give us an immutable infrastructure on top of which our reality runs. I think rationalizing people being lazy (and speaking for their laziness) is a poor way of approaching things, unless we all just want to be lazy. If that's the case, carry on! :) Taking a "big salary" is just a symptom of not being careful with how we implement consciousness on the Internet. Taking a moment to appreciate what one has in this moment is far more important than what one may have tomorrow.

by rsp1984 10y ago

nxzero 10y ago

Working your butt off has zero to do with having a executable vision that creates value. Clearly shit needs to get done, but there's only so many hours in the a life of a startup and being able to see what needs to be done ultimately is more important than just getting stuff done. __ "I choose a lazy person to do a hard job. Because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it." - Bill Gates

amorphid 10y ago
I do not agree. A person who doesn't work their butt off usually lacks any sort of meaningful perspective derived from hard work.
- nxzero 10y ago
  "A shortcut is not shortcut, unless you know the way." - nxzero Finding shortcuts does not require hard work, but a willingness to be different and take risks others will not.
  - amorphid 10y ago
    "Someone else already knows the trade secret for the problem I'm trying to solve, but they won't tell me the solution, because I don't have lots of money. Even if they did tell me, I probably wouldn't understand it, because I lack the perspective of experience." -amorphid "I have no idea in which direction I need to go, so I'm gonna have to work my butt off to find the right path." -amorphid "I worked really hard, and found a solution!" -amorphid
rsp1984 10y ago
Oh, I agree that a startup needs an executable vision. However if someone provides just the vision but doesn't put as much work in as everybody else that's an advisory role, not a co-founder role, and should be reflected in the equity distribution. The thing is that vision is just so much easier than actually doing the grinding grunt work. "Vision without execution is hallucination" - Thomas Edison
- nxzero 10y ago
  Disagree. I've literally run a startup where I took an opportunity I saw, pitched it to a cofounder, got a single client, cofounder did all the work. After year, cofounder was tried of doing work, so I told them how to turn the service into a product and rapidly got five clients; after that, the cofounder didn't have to do anymore work either. I'm not lazy, happy to do hard work, but if I see an exploitable situation I will not create work just to feel good about things. Do exactly what needs to be done, nothing less, nothing more. Footnote: Not a fan of Edison, he in fact was lazy, refused to change, and spent a good deal of his life literally pounding rock to no end.
  - leesalminen 10y ago
    Why would you exploit your cofounder into performing a disproportionate amount of work?
    - nxzero 10y ago
      I didn't exploit the cofounder, I presented them with an opportunity, they were fully aware of the situation. In fact, they were excited about the project, enjoyed the work, and often bragged about it to our friends. Beyond that, after I told him how to turn the service into a product, I turn something that without me would have had no value after they stopped into something that produced value for years without any major effort from either of us. EDIT: Truly curious as to the reasoning behind the downvotes and would welcome a comment expressing someone's thoughts on why this comment has received 3+ downvotes.
brahmwg 10y ago
I get what you're saying, and i think the whole "you gotta work your butt off to be successful" thing is a lingering noting from workoholic culture. "How many hours you put in?" is the corporate version of "how much can you lift?" And I believe it's not exactly right; working smarter is better than just working harder. But both do entail work. Then again, isn't there some quote about inspiration and perspiration ;)
- hvo 10y ago
  Well, here is this about Bill Gates coding 18hrs a day in his first job. http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/10/bill-gates-first-real-job/409084/ http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/10/bill-gates-first-re...
  - krmboya 10y ago
    Very interesting. Perhaps if he'd managed to skip undergraduate studies straight to graduate school as adviced he'd be wrestling with hard enough problems not to think about writing programs for the upcoming PCs of the era
- jomamaxx 10y ago
  "you gotta work your butt off to be successful" thing is a lingering noting from workaholic culture. " Completely false. There are very, very few startups that are successful wherein the founders are not putting in crazy hours.
jomamaxx 10y ago
"Working your butt off has zero to do with having a executable vision that creates value." Except that 'working your butt of has everything to do with actually executing that vision' Google, FB, Apple, MS - founders 100% of these companies worked really, really hard to get there. Bill Gates was notorious for pushing his people to extremes.
sharemywin 10y ago
The thing you missing is leadership. People won't bust there ass off over and above what they are paid for a lazy person that looks to exploit them. But, if you can work your ass off and have a vision people want to follow with a whole lot of luck you might create something special.

tdb7893 10y ago

I'm not sure I would go that far but I have always had very mediocre experiences with people who describe themselves as "visionary"

api 10y ago
Visionary is something other people might call you after you earn it. Beware of anyone who toots their own horn like that.
Silhouette 10y ago
I don't know about the word "visionary" or using it as some sort of self-descriptive label, but I do think it's important for the founders investing their time and effort into a startup to have a vision for what they're really trying to achieve and to dream big. That's obviously not sufficient for success, but I suspect that to some extent it is necessary, given the commitment that tends to be needed from founders and perhaps early employees and how difficult it can be to ride out the rough patches without some sort of goal you believe will be worth it in the end.
rdtsc 10y ago
That's my heuristic -- those who call themselves "visionaries", "architects" or "coding ninjas" are usually those you have to stay away from.
- Amygaz 10y ago
  I agree with you. And I also have a tendency, based on a few personal experiences, to associate self-proclaimed visionaries, with narcissistic personality disorder. And it is also my experience that, besides being very active in taking credits for other people ideas, design and work, they are typically lazy and a hindrance. However, somehow, they're alway seems to be able to find people who will do the job for them, from bench work to CEO work, so they can call themselves successful.
  - jomamaxx 10y ago
    There is definitely such a thing as 'architecture' role in software. Usually they have a lot of experience, and work on larger teams where such things are necessary.

kordless 10y ago

> Most people just prefer slacking off to working their butts off. Representing the individual desire to work for "most people" isn't your job or your right any more than it's my right to say your internal view of the world is totally fucked up if you think that way. It's all well and fine to mention there are sociopaths in the industry, but colluding them with narcissists is unreasonable. Narcissism is simply the ability to externalize one's internal viewpoints in a way that tend to spread that same viewpoint to other's internal views, often at times without empathy for those who it infects. If that benefits the company, whose function is to make everyone there more money, then narcissism may a required trait of the company's leader. If someone can't accept that for themselves, then they should leave the company or never join to begin with. The whole sociopath matter is another thing entirely. Sociopaths can be untrustworthy, which makes dealing with them problematic.

jomamaxx 10y ago
I think it's safe to say most people would rather slack off than work extremely hard. Sometimes, rarely, people have a strong sense of purpose, or a very high level of professionalism. But 95% of people, if they could chose to take a big salary - AND - chill and not do much, probably would.
- kordless 10y ago
  Somebody worked their asses off to give us an immutable infrastructure on top of which our reality runs. I think rationalizing people being lazy (and speaking for their laziness) is a poor way of approaching things, unless we all just want to be lazy. If that's the case, carry on! :) Taking a "big salary" is just a symptom of not being careful with how we implement consciousness on the Internet. Taking a moment to appreciate what one has in this moment is far more important than what one may have tomorrow.