4 ms·

Come on Paul -- trying for a more likely outcome of being a single-digit millionaire instead of an unlikely outcome of being a triple-digit millionaire doesn't

Come on Paul -- trying for a more likely outcome of being a single-digit millionaire instead of an unlikely outcome of being a triple-digit millionaire doesn't make you "not ambitious." I'm not saying it's bad to swing for the fences! Just that many people do out of perceived necessity.

pg 16y ago
I find that the founders who have ambitious goals rarely express them by numbers of digits, which are extremely hard to predict, but more often by how much they want to change the world. For example, the founders of Reddit, which was a disruptive innovation of the classic type, had as their slogan "freedom from the press."
- houseabsolute 16y ago
  I wonder if in the end the irony of having that slogan and being acquired by Conde escaped any of them. Or the irony that maybe the press is not the darkest master to which to be enslaved.
  - nanospider 16y ago
    Money changes everything; People, relationships, principles, slogans, etc. to name a few.
  - pg 16y ago
    The slogan refers to users' freedom to get information where they like, and that wasn't impaired at all by the acquisition. As far as I know, Conde Nast only once tried to dictate what was on Reddit, and that blew up in their faces.
    - houseabsolute 16y ago
      > users' freedom to get information where they like As far as I can tell users already had that freedom without Reddit. In fact, as a link aggregator, the most Reddit could be said to have added was a directory of that freedom. Such directories were already well and alive on sites like Digg and Slashdot (in different forms, to be sure). It's hard to see what about that is disruptive. But, whatever, it's just a slogan.
    - shrikant 16y ago
      When/what was this?
- lsc 16y ago
  First, I think the difference between 'incremental' and 'disruptive' is sometimes less clear than people seem to think. Cloud computing is quite similar to old style dedicated server rental with the incremental improvement of the ability to buy in small timeslices and a standard provisioning system designed for developers, rather than for sysadmins. Reddit, I think, is an incremental improvement on technologies pioneered by Kuro5hin.org and slashdot before that. (I'm not saying it wasn't also disruptive. I can show you revenue graphs from before and after Uggedal's review of me got on reddit. It certainly was disruptive for me.) Now, I think if you are bootstrapping, you are probably best off explaining your idea incrementally. It's easier to understand, and it doesn't sound as cheesy or as crazy. If you are explaining your idea to me (and I suspect that this applies to most people who are primarily technical, but I could be wrong) you are better off explaining your idea incrementally, because I'm more likely to understand it, and I'm less likely to dismiss you as another crazy MBA. If you are going for VC funding, then you might want to use the language of disruption, as that is what they require. A VC doesn't want a 'slightly better' dedicated server.
  - yters 16y ago
    A new buzzword?
- ahoyhere 16y ago
  If their ambitious goal was freedom, why did they sell to a publishing company? This is what I don't get. You make something you're passionate about… and then you get rid of it. Or you get bought, with the acquisition. Into, that's right, a job! Typically with superiors! Which was what you were fleeing from to start with. So was their ambition a number of digits, or was it freedom? EDIT: I've met the founders of some very high profile sales to big companies, including Google, who were incredibly miserable about doing so -- afterwards. And yet here, they are poster children for success.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- donaq 16y ago
  Then again, as the OP has stated, some of the most disruptive technologies (such as Google and the iPod) did not set out to be disruptive. Their disruptiveness was merely a side effect of executing really well on incremental improvement. As for having changing the world as a goal, no disrespect intended to the Reddit guys, but it hasn't disrupted or changed the world of anyone I know who isn't in tech. By way of comparison, Hacker News itself has changed my world way more than Reddit. Going off on a tangent, how often do people really want the world changed? Every time, or even one percent of the time, an ambitious startup is founded seems a tad excessive to me.
- Kliment 16y ago
  I don't see why there has to be a conflict between the two. From where I'm standing, smartbear's point is "don't try to tell people what they want" and your point is "don't be afraid to change the world". There's plenty of space where both of these are true, and I'd argue the difference is more of founder philosophy than of actual content. Reddit did not attempt to change what readers wanted. Arguably, this is why they succeeded.

pg 16y ago

I find that the founders who have ambitious goals rarely express them by numbers of digits, which are extremely hard to predict, but more often by how much they want to change the world. For example, the founders of Reddit, which was a disruptive innovation of the classic type, had as their slogan "freedom from the press."

houseabsolute 16y ago
I wonder if in the end the irony of having that slogan and being acquired by Conde escaped any of them. Or the irony that maybe the press is not the darkest master to which to be enslaved.
- nanospider 16y ago
  Money changes everything; People, relationships, principles, slogans, etc. to name a few.
- pg 16y ago
  The slogan refers to users' freedom to get information where they like, and that wasn't impaired at all by the acquisition. As far as I know, Conde Nast only once tried to dictate what was on Reddit, and that blew up in their faces.
  - houseabsolute 16y ago
    > users' freedom to get information where they like As far as I can tell users already had that freedom without Reddit. In fact, as a link aggregator, the most Reddit could be said to have added was a directory of that freedom. Such directories were already well and alive on sites like Digg and Slashdot (in different forms, to be sure). It's hard to see what about that is disruptive. But, whatever, it's just a slogan.
  - shrikant 16y ago
    When/what was this?
lsc 16y ago
First, I think the difference between 'incremental' and 'disruptive' is sometimes less clear than people seem to think. Cloud computing is quite similar to old style dedicated server rental with the incremental improvement of the ability to buy in small timeslices and a standard provisioning system designed for developers, rather than for sysadmins. Reddit, I think, is an incremental improvement on technologies pioneered by Kuro5hin.org and slashdot before that. (I'm not saying it wasn't also disruptive. I can show you revenue graphs from before and after Uggedal's review of me got on reddit. It certainly was disruptive for me.) Now, I think if you are bootstrapping, you are probably best off explaining your idea incrementally. It's easier to understand, and it doesn't sound as cheesy or as crazy. If you are explaining your idea to me (and I suspect that this applies to most people who are primarily technical, but I could be wrong) you are better off explaining your idea incrementally, because I'm more likely to understand it, and I'm less likely to dismiss you as another crazy MBA. If you are going for VC funding, then you might want to use the language of disruption, as that is what they require. A VC doesn't want a 'slightly better' dedicated server.
- yters 16y ago
  A new buzzword?
ahoyhere 16y ago
If their ambitious goal was freedom, why did they sell to a publishing company? This is what I don't get. You make something you're passionate about… and then you get rid of it. Or you get bought, with the acquisition. Into, that's right, a job! Typically with superiors! Which was what you were fleeing from to start with. So was their ambition a number of digits, or was it freedom? EDIT: I've met the founders of some very high profile sales to big companies, including Google, who were incredibly miserable about doing so -- afterwards. And yet here, they are poster children for success.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
donaq 16y ago
Then again, as the OP has stated, some of the most disruptive technologies (such as Google and the iPod) did not set out to be disruptive. Their disruptiveness was merely a side effect of executing really well on incremental improvement. As for having changing the world as a goal, no disrespect intended to the Reddit guys, but it hasn't disrupted or changed the world of anyone I know who isn't in tech. By way of comparison, Hacker News itself has changed my world way more than Reddit. Going off on a tangent, how often do people really want the world changed? Every time, or even one percent of the time, an ambitious startup is founded seems a tad excessive to me.
Kliment 16y ago
I don't see why there has to be a conflict between the two. From where I'm standing, smartbear's point is "don't try to tell people what they want" and your point is "don't be afraid to change the world". There's plenty of space where both of these are true, and I'd argue the difference is more of founder philosophy than of actual content. Reddit did not attempt to change what readers wanted. Arguably, this is why they succeeded.