4 ms·

> I would absolutely not sign on to a company whose space is a garage. First of all, it signals precariousness and non-seriousness So you would have avoided Ap

> I would absolutely not sign on to a company whose space is a garage. First of all, it signals precariousness and non-seriousness So you would have avoided Apple and Amazon then?

adrianN 7y ago
They would also have avoided a million companies you never heard of.
- loceng 7y ago
  Right, so following the leading metric for your decision basing it on off of if they mostly run out of a "garage" is a terrible idea; adding the two Apple founders into the equation, assuming you have the opportunity to get to know them and their ideas and plans well enough, would be an important part to the equation of deciding where to work.
  - adrianN 7y ago
    Only if you believe that you can distinguish lucky founders from normal founders with sufficient precision to beat the odds. Personally I wouldn't trust myself to do that.
    - loceng 7y ago
      Of course, you can only do what you're most comfortable with - which should depend on your understanding of as many pieces to the puzzle possible, that's how we understand risk/reward, and how we hopefully make calculated decisions.
umanwizard 7y ago
If they were in a literal garage and I could have gotten another job paying 300k or more in a real office with free food then yes, I definitely would have avoided them.
- loceng 7y ago
  Of course you're allowed to choose your preferences and priorities, how you make decisions. There are also of course very nice garages, attached to nice houses - and very talented people who can maximize the resources available to them at any moment because they have a very clear plan to understand the strategy, path they must take. Keeping costs low by reducing real estate costs is in part why fully decentralized companies exist and work so well - they can scale very efficiently, however I believe that fully decentralized in the long-term won't work due to limited fluidity; spatial organization is important if not critical in certain respects.

> I would absolutely not sign on to a company whose space is a garage. First of all, it signals precariousness and non-seriousness So you would have avoided Apple and Amazon then?

adrianN 7y ago

They would also have avoided a million companies you never heard of.

loceng 7y ago
Right, so following the leading metric for your decision basing it on off of if they mostly run out of a "garage" is a terrible idea; adding the two Apple founders into the equation, assuming you have the opportunity to get to know them and their ideas and plans well enough, would be an important part to the equation of deciding where to work.
- adrianN 7y ago
  Only if you believe that you can distinguish lucky founders from normal founders with sufficient precision to beat the odds. Personally I wouldn't trust myself to do that.
  - loceng 7y ago
    Of course, you can only do what you're most comfortable with - which should depend on your understanding of as many pieces to the puzzle possible, that's how we understand risk/reward, and how we hopefully make calculated decisions.

umanwizard 7y ago

If they were in a literal garage and I could have gotten another job paying 300k or more in a real office with free food then yes, I definitely would have avoided them.

loceng 7y ago
Of course you're allowed to choose your preferences and priorities, how you make decisions. There are also of course very nice garages, attached to nice houses - and very talented people who can maximize the resources available to them at any moment because they have a very clear plan to understand the strategy, path they must take. Keeping costs low by reducing real estate costs is in part why fully decentralized companies exist and work so well - they can scale very efficiently, however I believe that fully decentralized in the long-term won't work due to limited fluidity; spatial organization is important if not critical in certain respects.