4 ms·
Relax. The GP's point is that definitions are important and litigating the definition of the word startup has been tried before and doesn't end up benefiting a
by mbesto 10y ago
Relax.
The GP's point is that definitions are important and litigating the definition of the word startup has been tried before and doesn't end up benefiting anyone.
The logic flows as such:
1. People making judgements about startups
2. Not everyone can agree what the definition of a startup is (even if the benevolent dictator has stated their opinion on the matter)
3. Therefore it's incredibly difficult to agree or disagree about judgements of startups because the underlying definition is not clear
You may claim that #3 should be pg's definition "because its HN/YC", but not all HN members agree.
- jessedhillon 10y agoOkay, here's the other thing though -- unless you use the definition I'm providing, the article linked to here about "playing startup" doesn't make any sense. Unless someone genuinely doesn't understand that startup is being used in a narrower sense, there's no reason to raise this objection. It's like objecting to a discussion about angels (the investors) because the word typically refers to angelic beings, or the baseball team.