3 ms·
Initially, I thought the question was referring to a project on strictly technical terms. After thinking, I soon realized that it's not all about technicalities
by kyro 20y ago
Initially, I thought the question was referring to a project on strictly technical terms. After thinking, I soon realized that it's not all about technicalities and complexity in code, rather it can be taken as why would the atmosphere, communities, ease of use, value, services, etc. that your project will create be difficult to duplicate by competitors.
Surely, big companies such as Google, etc., can probably code any given project in fractions of a time less than the time say a couple hackers can complete it in, but I believe it's the environment and quality of service that you provide that differentiates one project from a duplicate.
At least that's how I interpreted it.
- npk 20y agoKyro - what you're saying makes a lot of sense, but you're working under different assumptions than I. Sppose you chose random groupings from the set of all YC funded founders, and give them a random idea from set of all initial ideas, the resulting companies might be different, but the ratio of successes will stay the same. (Assume everyone is equally good friends, etc.) The launched YC companies all built the company, including all the "atmosphere, communities, ease of use, value, services, etc." in three months or so. Again, any random pairing of YC funded founders could have done this. For example, I don't think any random pair of founders could run a successful MEMS foundry, which requires specific knowledge. So, now, I read the question as what's different about the founders and not, the company.