4 ms·

This falls under what I call "just" philosophies. They are quick summations ("A is just B") that can radically misrepresent the facts on the ground, and easily

This falls under what I call "just" philosophies. They are quick summations ("A is just B") that can radically misrepresent the facts on the ground, and easily leave their adherents desperate for tools to solve a problem that they previously defined away with a hand wave. In reality, it is the case that people often care deeply. Many of those hired by or paying for a business are in fact excited to be able to help write its story. Many aren't though, sure. Maybe they're just in it for superficial competitions or comparisons. But you'll never know who's who if you don't start an active dialogue and analysis process. What's super helpful as an outcome of work in this area is to understand who cares about what, which incidentally helps you create a model for getting them to care more about what you care about. If nobody really cares, we're all screwed. But that particular thought model only works on that darwinian level, the one that sadly operates as the kind of unspoken shadow of many who work in tech today. We get together and bash ideas together and somehow when our feelings come to a head we reach for a "just" philosophy. People do care though, and that means we each need to find a way to work in that caring world and explore it just as well as the uncaring one. Consider each one of these as important truths: 1) Nobody cares, 2) Some people care, and 3) All people care.

davedx 7y ago
Yeah, some of these VC blogs are terrible. At least Stratechery tries to provide some actual quantitative analysis. A16Z looks like so much blog spam. Disappointing.
frereubu 7y ago
I agree that the post is simplistic. A charitable interpretation might be that it's a naive version of the approach advocated by some existential philosophers where you consider that everything that happens to you is "your fault", so you're constantly figuring out ways to make your situation better rather than just giving up, or thinking of ways in which you could have made a situation in the past better so the next time it happens you make a better fist of it. The difficulty is not to think any less of yourself if you fail despite continuing to try. I think the thing that's lacking in this post is that clearly people do care, and if you recognise that you can ask for their help. Even if you approach things as if everything is "your fault", doesn't mean that you can't collaborate with other people to improve your situation.
barrkel 7y ago
A nice side effect of thinking that nobody cares is that you don't feel guilty about taking most of the rewards when you come through with success at the far end. After all, nobody else cared enough.
kresten 7y ago
I’m not in agreement with you. The original poster is saying that as founder, no one cares to the level you do, no one else has as much at stake, others care but to a point. The original posts point is that as founder it’s really up to you and no one else. If this fails, as founder you lose all the things you risked, possibly everything you have. No one else is likely to have as much at risk as you. This means you care in a way and to a depth no one else does. Of course others care, of course your grandma cares, of course your momma cares, of course head of marketing cares and of course the investor cares, but none of these people have everything on the line. Everyone else except you can walk away. No one else is going to relentlessly hit this problem till it’s solves except you. That’s the point.
- seer 7y ago
  Isn’t the lack of equitable outcome a major driver in this? Of course head of marketing will not care as much - they will not be compensated as much if they solve your business problem’. Both in status and money. As a counter example - we can look at organizations which have goals that are not only monetary in nature - spacex, nasa in the 50s, the red cross - organizations where there are plenty of people that care about the goal alongside the founders to a great extend. Plenty of people there outside of leadership also care a lot. A startup that picks a worthy goal like that can in fact attract those types and do so regularly. People do care.
- headsoup 7y ago
  This is only true where the founder has the most risk relative to the rest, but I'd say that's often not so. Founders can have a career stream to fall back to, additional capital, Etc. Some people could risk being on the street if they lose their job. There are also numerous ways the founder can walk away It's very relative.
- heavenlyblue 7y ago
  >> but none of these people have everything on the line. What everything exactly? I don’t know a single CEO who isn’t paid at least a good average wage of a high-level exec in a startup. On top of that, they have 0 liability if anything goes south. And then the golden chutes.
ancarda 7y ago
"Just" is one of the most dangerous words in the English language. I used to work with a guy who used that all the damn time. "It's just X" he'd say. He was never right. Things are never just that simple
leothekim 7y ago
Disagree. You may listen to all this advice and follow through with engaging with your people productively only to find you’ve used up your budget or runway and have to lay them off. As you move up the ladder, reasons matter less and less. But outcome always does.

davedx 7y ago

Yeah, some of these VC blogs are terrible. At least Stratechery tries to provide some actual quantitative analysis. A16Z looks like so much blog spam. Disappointing.

frereubu 7y ago

I agree that the post is simplistic. A charitable interpretation might be that it's a naive version of the approach advocated by some existential philosophers where you consider that everything that happens to you is "your fault", so you're constantly figuring out ways to make your situation better rather than just giving up, or thinking of ways in which you could have made a situation in the past better so the next time it happens you make a better fist of it. The difficulty is not to think any less of yourself if you fail despite continuing to try. I think the thing that's lacking in this post is that clearly people do care, and if you recognise that you can ask for their help. Even if you approach things as if everything is "your fault", doesn't mean that you can't collaborate with other people to improve your situation.

barrkel 7y ago

A nice side effect of thinking that nobody cares is that you don't feel guilty about taking most of the rewards when you come through with success at the far end. After all, nobody else cared enough.

kresten 7y ago

I’m not in agreement with you. The original poster is saying that as founder, no one cares to the level you do, no one else has as much at stake, others care but to a point. The original posts point is that as founder it’s really up to you and no one else. If this fails, as founder you lose all the things you risked, possibly everything you have. No one else is likely to have as much at risk as you. This means you care in a way and to a depth no one else does. Of course others care, of course your grandma cares, of course your momma cares, of course head of marketing cares and of course the investor cares, but none of these people have everything on the line. Everyone else except you can walk away. No one else is going to relentlessly hit this problem till it’s solves except you. That’s the point.

seer 7y ago
Isn’t the lack of equitable outcome a major driver in this? Of course head of marketing will not care as much - they will not be compensated as much if they solve your business problem’. Both in status and money. As a counter example - we can look at organizations which have goals that are not only monetary in nature - spacex, nasa in the 50s, the red cross - organizations where there are plenty of people that care about the goal alongside the founders to a great extend. Plenty of people there outside of leadership also care a lot. A startup that picks a worthy goal like that can in fact attract those types and do so regularly. People do care.
headsoup 7y ago
This is only true where the founder has the most risk relative to the rest, but I'd say that's often not so. Founders can have a career stream to fall back to, additional capital, Etc. Some people could risk being on the street if they lose their job. There are also numerous ways the founder can walk away It's very relative.
heavenlyblue 7y ago
>> but none of these people have everything on the line. What everything exactly? I don’t know a single CEO who isn’t paid at least a good average wage of a high-level exec in a startup. On top of that, they have 0 liability if anything goes south. And then the golden chutes.

ancarda 7y ago

"Just" is one of the most dangerous words in the English language. I used to work with a guy who used that all the damn time. "It's just X" he'd say. He was never right. Things are never just that simple

leothekim 7y ago

Disagree. You may listen to all this advice and follow through with engaging with your people productively only to find you’ve used up your budget or runway and have to lay them off. As you move up the ladder, reasons matter less and less. But outcome always does.