5 ms·

So, to sum up: To get into YC and be successful in Silicon Valley, I have to have gone to Stanford, worked at Google and be building a social app? pg, say it a

by il 16y ago

So, to sum up: To get into YC and be successful in Silicon Valley, I have to have gone to Stanford, worked at Google and be building a social app? pg, say it ain't so! Are people like me who went to state school, never had a real job and are building tools for businesses doomed?

drusenko 16y ago
All three Weebly founders went to a state school (Penn State!) and never had a real job. It's certainly possibly to be successful no matter what school you went to.
joshu 16y ago
Getting into YC and being successful in SV are orthogonal.
- chunkbot 16y ago
  I don't think they're orthogonal; they're probably positively correlated.
- gms 16y ago
  What does orthogonal mean here? I know what it means in linear algebra, but I have trouble translating that into a colloquial sense.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - steveklabnik 16y ago
    Generally, the meaning of orthogonal in conversation has become orthogonal to the "real" meaning: It can mean both 'perpendicular' as well as 'parallel.' "At odds" and "unrelated." It's really kind of silly.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
  - coffee 16y ago
    My interpretation of it reads: "Getting into YC and being successful in SV do not overlap." In other words, they are independent of each other...
mmt 16y ago
I'm sure that's hyperbole but based on the truth. If one of YC's methods is to keep up a certain level of excitement, and that's tough to do if you're building something highly functional but with little coolness value. Arguably, this correlates with degree of success[1]. Today it's social apps, tomorrow, it's Web 4.0. It also seems apropos, considering that YC is, itself, a social program. I've only been to one of their semi-public events, as well as a couple loosely affiliated ones, and they were all clearly biased toward extroversion. Similarly, I'd suggest "doomed" is hyperbole, as well, unless you mean getting accepted into their program. As a someone heavily introverted[2], it might be a form of torture, resulting in its own doom. [1] Assuming success instead of failure. I agree there's something to be said for the potential scale of social apps compared to business tools, We haven't yet seen the likes of Facebook, and Zynga operate as public companies, without venture money pumping into the ecosystem. This tends not to be an issue, except with tools for startups. [2] Though not at all shy.
pg 16y ago
It ain't so. In fact I wrote a whole essay about what a bad predictor people's colleges turn out to be. http://paulgraham.com/colleges.html http://paulgraham.com/colleges.html Edit: I just took a look at a random sample of startups in the batch we just accepted. Out of 21 founders, 2 went to Stanford, and 2 went to Ivy League colleges.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- ivankirigin 16y ago
  Just 21 founders?
  - ecuzzillo 16y ago
    It was a random sample of the batch.
    - ivankirigin 16y ago
      Whoops

by il 16y ago

drusenko 16y ago

All three Weebly founders went to a state school (Penn State!) and never had a real job. It's certainly possibly to be successful no matter what school you went to.

joshu 16y ago

Getting into YC and being successful in SV are orthogonal.

chunkbot 16y ago
I don't think they're orthogonal; they're probably positively correlated.
gms 16y ago
What does orthogonal mean here? I know what it means in linear algebra, but I have trouble translating that into a colloquial sense.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- steveklabnik 16y ago
  Generally, the meaning of orthogonal in conversation has become orthogonal to the "real" meaning: It can mean both 'perpendicular' as well as 'parallel.' "At odds" and "unrelated." It's really kind of silly.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- coffee 16y ago
  My interpretation of it reads: "Getting into YC and being successful in SV do not overlap." In other words, they are independent of each other...

mmt 16y ago

I'm sure that's hyperbole but based on the truth. If one of YC's methods is to keep up a certain level of excitement, and that's tough to do if you're building something highly functional but with little coolness value. Arguably, this correlates with degree of success[1]. Today it's social apps, tomorrow, it's Web 4.0. It also seems apropos, considering that YC is, itself, a social program. I've only been to one of their semi-public events, as well as a couple loosely affiliated ones, and they were all clearly biased toward extroversion. Similarly, I'd suggest "doomed" is hyperbole, as well, unless you mean getting accepted into their program. As a someone heavily introverted[2], it might be a form of torture, resulting in its own doom. [1] Assuming success instead of failure. I agree there's something to be said for the potential scale of social apps compared to business tools, We haven't yet seen the likes of Facebook, and Zynga operate as public companies, without venture money pumping into the ecosystem. This tends not to be an issue, except with tools for startups. [2] Though not at all shy.

pg 16y ago

It ain't so. In fact I wrote a whole essay about what a bad predictor people's colleges turn out to be. http://paulgraham.com/colleges.html http://paulgraham.com/colleges.html Edit: I just took a look at a random sample of startups in the batch we just accepted. Out of 21 founders, 2 went to Stanford, and 2 went to Ivy League colleges.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
ivankirigin 16y ago
Just 21 founders?
- ecuzzillo 16y ago
  It was a random sample of the batch.
  - ivankirigin 16y ago
    Whoops