3 ms·

Your understanding of Google is not at all accurate.

by paul 19y ago

davidw 19y ago
.oO(who the heck voted that down?! )
deleted 19y ago
[deleted]
NSX2 19y ago
My understanding of Google may not be accurate, but my understanding of why people hand their money over to Google is probably as accurate as it is possible to be. Misunderstandings of any details you have in mind aside, in general Google too fits into the general idea: before Google started thinking about how to channel its technology to meet the needs of people with money, it was an interesting startup, but not a great business. The second it took the needs of customers with money into account, then those people handed over their money and that made Google a great business. My point is that in my mind there is a simple distinction that most startups seem to either accidentally or purposely ignore: startup = bunch of guys working on a cool technical thing / business = bunch of guys working on a thing that makes life better for paying customers. Having not seen Benny Hill since childhood, I assumed that the reason people were starting startups were to transition to businesses which made life better for paying customers. Apparently I was wrong. People here, for the most part, as well as just about every programmer I've run into over the last year or so trying to start my own thing, seem to be more interested in starting a startup so they could post "Hey guys, check out my cool thing" type of posts. I don't know where I'm going wrong here, but unless somebody finds a way to transform positive feedback from Hacker News into cold hard cash, that's not a business. At least not IMHO. But judging by the feedback I get on other posts, not too many people seem to care about starting a business, just starting "startups" where "startup" = somebody pays me money to sit around writing code and drinking Mountain Dew. I can't see how that's different from a job where you happen to be working on a cool project.
NSX2 19y ago
On another note, I just looked at your profile and read some of your articles. Why take issues with "my understanding of Google" when it turns out I'm making a similar point to what you wrote about in terms of being humble enough to put pride aside and find out what people actually want/need/will pay for rather assuming for them only to find out that nobody cares about the brilliant programming of an idea nobody but the programmer appreciates? Isn't that what you yourself said in one of your posts on your blog, or am I misunderstanding your position?
- paul 19y ago
  You're right that startups should be focused on building things that people will want instead of just trying to use cool technology, but you're mistaken in believing that Google wasn't doing that. Google had a strong following of enthusiastic users from very early on. "Make something people want" also happens to be the YC slogan, though I think it should be "Make something people will want", since people don't always know what they want.
  - NSX2 19y ago
    Okay, let's leave Google out of this for a moment. My emphasis was that the transition from "startup" to "business" seems to happen when you connect with paying customers. I even posted a post to this effect where I basically summed up the most interesting part (for me) of a marketing book: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=127157 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=127157 In order to have a clear value proposition to get people to give you their money, you need to answer (according to the book) these questions in succession of difficulty: Who you are / what you do / for who / because they need what thing that they can't do without you / unlike your competitors / your different in what way / which is a very important distinction (how?) and makes people care (why?). I'd say most startups start with "who they are" and stop. Some make it to "what they do" although not expressed clearly. The part about "for who" and "why they care" never seems to be spelled out, just implied or something. The first response is by some guy who took this as both a personal attack and an attack on the whole Y Combinator community! Then PG comes on and says, "well such and such venture capitalist says he funds business that solve a problem the founders had." I try to point out that that only holds true as long as that problem is one a huge market of people are also having and are willing to pay for the resolution of. Then, in a rather futile and pointless exercise, he goes on to systematically knock about 30 points off my all-time high of 80, perhaps under the delusion that I secretly covet a high point tally so I can impress him or something. It's like, the very mere suggestion that people need to tie their technical ability to practical solution solving for paying customers, especially in this economic climate, seems to meet with rage and fury from programmers who seem to take basic economic reality like a personal insult or something. > "Make something people will want", since people don't > always know what they want. That would need perspective and ability to anticipate possible patterns of future development, ability to assign probabilities to multiple scenarios, etc. All "right brain stuff". Most programmers I've come across, especially here, couldn't seem to care less as long as they post their startup and score points from peers.

Your understanding of Google is not at all accurate.

by paul 19y ago

Your understanding of Google is not at all accurate.

davidw 19y ago

.oO(who the heck voted that down?! )

deleted 19y ago

[deleted]

NSX2 19y ago

My understanding of Google may not be accurate, but my understanding of why people hand their money over to Google is probably as accurate as it is possible to be. Misunderstandings of any details you have in mind aside, in general Google too fits into the general idea: before Google started thinking about how to channel its technology to meet the needs of people with money, it was an interesting startup, but not a great business. The second it took the needs of customers with money into account, then those people handed over their money and that made Google a great business. My point is that in my mind there is a simple distinction that most startups seem to either accidentally or purposely ignore: startup = bunch of guys working on a cool technical thing / business = bunch of guys working on a thing that makes life better for paying customers. Having not seen Benny Hill since childhood, I assumed that the reason people were starting startups were to transition to businesses which made life better for paying customers. Apparently I was wrong. People here, for the most part, as well as just about every programmer I've run into over the last year or so trying to start my own thing, seem to be more interested in starting a startup so they could post "Hey guys, check out my cool thing" type of posts. I don't know where I'm going wrong here, but unless somebody finds a way to transform positive feedback from Hacker News into cold hard cash, that's not a business. At least not IMHO. But judging by the feedback I get on other posts, not too many people seem to care about starting a business, just starting "startups" where "startup" = somebody pays me money to sit around writing code and drinking Mountain Dew. I can't see how that's different from a job where you happen to be working on a cool project.

NSX2 19y ago

On another note, I just looked at your profile and read some of your articles. Why take issues with "my understanding of Google" when it turns out I'm making a similar point to what you wrote about in terms of being humble enough to put pride aside and find out what people actually want/need/will pay for rather assuming for them only to find out that nobody cares about the brilliant programming of an idea nobody but the programmer appreciates? Isn't that what you yourself said in one of your posts on your blog, or am I misunderstanding your position?

paul 19y ago
You're right that startups should be focused on building things that people will want instead of just trying to use cool technology, but you're mistaken in believing that Google wasn't doing that. Google had a strong following of enthusiastic users from very early on. "Make something people want" also happens to be the YC slogan, though I think it should be "Make something people will want", since people don't always know what they want.
- NSX2 19y ago
  Okay, let's leave Google out of this for a moment. My emphasis was that the transition from "startup" to "business" seems to happen when you connect with paying customers. I even posted a post to this effect where I basically summed up the most interesting part (for me) of a marketing book: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=127157 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=127157 In order to have a clear value proposition to get people to give you their money, you need to answer (according to the book) these questions in succession of difficulty: Who you are / what you do / for who / because they need what thing that they can't do without you / unlike your competitors / your different in what way / which is a very important distinction (how?) and makes people care (why?). I'd say most startups start with "who they are" and stop. Some make it to "what they do" although not expressed clearly. The part about "for who" and "why they care" never seems to be spelled out, just implied or something. The first response is by some guy who took this as both a personal attack and an attack on the whole Y Combinator community! Then PG comes on and says, "well such and such venture capitalist says he funds business that solve a problem the founders had." I try to point out that that only holds true as long as that problem is one a huge market of people are also having and are willing to pay for the resolution of. Then, in a rather futile and pointless exercise, he goes on to systematically knock about 30 points off my all-time high of 80, perhaps under the delusion that I secretly covet a high point tally so I can impress him or something. It's like, the very mere suggestion that people need to tie their technical ability to practical solution solving for paying customers, especially in this economic climate, seems to meet with rage and fury from programmers who seem to take basic economic reality like a personal insult or something. > "Make something people will want", since people don't > always know what they want. That would need perspective and ability to anticipate possible patterns of future development, ability to assign probabilities to multiple scenarios, etc. All "right brain stuff". Most programmers I've come across, especially here, couldn't seem to care less as long as they post their startup and score points from peers.