5 ms·

> At the time I worried all of life might be a similarly pointless jumping through hoops, but fortunately in college I discovered there was a thin stream of peo

> At the time I worried all of life might be a similarly pointless jumping through hoops, but fortunately in college I discovered there was a thin stream of people in the world who were interested in ideas and making new stuff, and I’ve tried to stay in that stream ever since This really stood out to me - what an excellent articulation of the intrinsic reason why founders want to be founders.

itronitron 7y ago
It strikes me as rather pretentious for someone to think that the 'stream of people that are interested in ideas and make new stuff' is thin
- cgrealy 7y ago
  You could probably rephrase that into the 'stream of people that are interested in ideas and make new stuff and then actually do something about it' is thin.
  - zimpenfish 7y ago
    And you could retort "because of systemic unfairness in the US" since being able to do something about your ideas requires free time, money, etc. which many people just don't have rather than any intrinsic holy goodness in "founders".
    - tasogare 7y ago
      > And you could retort "because of systemic unfairness in the US" One could retort that nice conspiracy theory to almost everything, and some people actually specialize into it. Now the thing is, having some constraints is a great way to get aware of a problem and try to solve it. This of course doesn't fit well with the whining mentality that some groups try to implant onto other for their own benefits.
      - zimpenfish 7y ago
        > One could retort that nice conspiracy theory to almost everything In what sense is it a conspiracy theory? Look at what COVID-19 is already highlighting over there where people can't get tested[1], get no help for being unable to work, etc. [1] Unless, of course, you're a baseball team and then you can get instantly tested.
      - lioeters 7y ago
        Another could retort that systemic inequality, the economic and financial "game" being rigged, is not a conspiracy theory; it's not even a conspiracy - that's why it's called "systemic", behavior exhibited by a system, not necessarily by intentional collaboration of individuals (though that clearly happens also). To that a counter-retort may say, even if we acknowledge the "systemic unfairness" in the US, the country is leading the world as far as entrepreneurship and startups go.
- choonway 7y ago
  It really is that thin. I'm sure he's talking about new stuff that you can't find by googling.
- chairmanwow1 7y ago
  How is it at all pretentious. It’s a statement of fact. Most people are not interested in innovating. Most entrepreneurs in the US are merely operating a small business in a well-defined market (restaurants, construction , car repair etc). There is a very small group of people that are thinking about these ideas at a higher level with enough conviction that they will act on it.
  - sanderjd 7y ago
    It is pretentious because being an entrepreneur who is interested in innovation is not the only way to be interested in ideas and making new things. It is placing this one kind of human endeavor on a pedestal above the myriad others. Which is pretentious!
    - hombre_fatal 7y ago
      Meh, people who create things are always going to be a subset of the population because it just takes more effort than the ring below it. And in my experience, it's definitely a thin stream. For all sorts of reasons, no doubt, but that's what it is. I didn't even meet another developer in the wild who actually liked building things on his own until I was in my late 20s and we became co-founders. And I went to a large public university with a good comp sci department. Not everyone is going to be a creator. Not sure what is so controversial about this. Getting hostile over the word "thin" seems a bit silly since it's also completely unquantified. And I wonder what your life circumstance is if you're encountering more of a "thick" stream. Are you a hackathon event planner or something?
      - sanderjd 7y ago
        Is it hostile to call an attitude pretentious? I don't think it is... Some attitudes are pretentious. What is pretentious about the quote that started this thread is the apparent belief that the kinds of people that do the things we talk about and admire on this site - building new kinds of software, starting growth-focused companies - are the only people "that are interested in ideas and making new stuff". I agree that there is a fairly thin stream of the building-software / starting-companies hackers that you're thinking of, but I see huge numbers of people from all walks of life being interested in ideas and creating things. Artists, writers, journalists, directors, bureaucrats, other types of business people, on and on and on. I think it is pretentious to look down our noses at pursuits that are not our own, that's all. Your comment about hackathon event planning is illustrative: hackathons are honestly not at all where I would go to find the highest concentration of people creating interesting new things.
- pritovido 7y ago
  As Mr Graham states, most arguments are about the differences in the meaning and definition of words. Your meaning of "being interested in ideas" and specially "stuff" is different to Graham's. This is not a surprise because both "idea" and "stuff" are just generic placeholders in which you can enter whatever you want. I see that a lot when I write or speak to a big group of people. No matter what I say somebody somewhere interprets it in the worst possible way I could barely imagine myself.
- blueboo 7y ago
  People mostly aren't interested enough to actually learn how to tackle those problems nor resourceful enough to act on that learning. Ideas are cheap. That long-nursed startup idea you've had has been tried a half-dozen times and discarded even more.
- dreamcompiler 7y ago
  It's quite thin. I grew up surrounded by such people, but after college out in the real world I discovered that the number of people who were truly curious about the world was around 10%. Even more surprising to me: The percentage wasn't very much higher for people who had PhDs.

itronitron 7y ago

It strikes me as rather pretentious for someone to think that the 'stream of people that are interested in ideas and make new stuff' is thin

cgrealy 7y ago
You could probably rephrase that into the 'stream of people that are interested in ideas and make new stuff and then actually do something about it' is thin.
- zimpenfish 7y ago
  And you could retort "because of systemic unfairness in the US" since being able to do something about your ideas requires free time, money, etc. which many people just don't have rather than any intrinsic holy goodness in "founders".
  - tasogare 7y ago
    > And you could retort "because of systemic unfairness in the US" One could retort that nice conspiracy theory to almost everything, and some people actually specialize into it. Now the thing is, having some constraints is a great way to get aware of a problem and try to solve it. This of course doesn't fit well with the whining mentality that some groups try to implant onto other for their own benefits.
    - zimpenfish 7y ago
      > One could retort that nice conspiracy theory to almost everything In what sense is it a conspiracy theory? Look at what COVID-19 is already highlighting over there where people can't get tested[1], get no help for being unable to work, etc. [1] Unless, of course, you're a baseball team and then you can get instantly tested.
    - lioeters 7y ago
      Another could retort that systemic inequality, the economic and financial "game" being rigged, is not a conspiracy theory; it's not even a conspiracy - that's why it's called "systemic", behavior exhibited by a system, not necessarily by intentional collaboration of individuals (though that clearly happens also). To that a counter-retort may say, even if we acknowledge the "systemic unfairness" in the US, the country is leading the world as far as entrepreneurship and startups go.
choonway 7y ago
It really is that thin. I'm sure he's talking about new stuff that you can't find by googling.
chairmanwow1 7y ago
How is it at all pretentious. It’s a statement of fact. Most people are not interested in innovating. Most entrepreneurs in the US are merely operating a small business in a well-defined market (restaurants, construction , car repair etc). There is a very small group of people that are thinking about these ideas at a higher level with enough conviction that they will act on it.
- sanderjd 7y ago
  It is pretentious because being an entrepreneur who is interested in innovation is not the only way to be interested in ideas and making new things. It is placing this one kind of human endeavor on a pedestal above the myriad others. Which is pretentious!
  - hombre_fatal 7y ago
    Meh, people who create things are always going to be a subset of the population because it just takes more effort than the ring below it. And in my experience, it's definitely a thin stream. For all sorts of reasons, no doubt, but that's what it is. I didn't even meet another developer in the wild who actually liked building things on his own until I was in my late 20s and we became co-founders. And I went to a large public university with a good comp sci department. Not everyone is going to be a creator. Not sure what is so controversial about this. Getting hostile over the word "thin" seems a bit silly since it's also completely unquantified. And I wonder what your life circumstance is if you're encountering more of a "thick" stream. Are you a hackathon event planner or something?
    - sanderjd 7y ago
      Is it hostile to call an attitude pretentious? I don't think it is... Some attitudes are pretentious. What is pretentious about the quote that started this thread is the apparent belief that the kinds of people that do the things we talk about and admire on this site - building new kinds of software, starting growth-focused companies - are the only people "that are interested in ideas and making new stuff". I agree that there is a fairly thin stream of the building-software / starting-companies hackers that you're thinking of, but I see huge numbers of people from all walks of life being interested in ideas and creating things. Artists, writers, journalists, directors, bureaucrats, other types of business people, on and on and on. I think it is pretentious to look down our noses at pursuits that are not our own, that's all. Your comment about hackathon event planning is illustrative: hackathons are honestly not at all where I would go to find the highest concentration of people creating interesting new things.
pritovido 7y ago
As Mr Graham states, most arguments are about the differences in the meaning and definition of words. Your meaning of "being interested in ideas" and specially "stuff" is different to Graham's. This is not a surprise because both "idea" and "stuff" are just generic placeholders in which you can enter whatever you want. I see that a lot when I write or speak to a big group of people. No matter what I say somebody somewhere interprets it in the worst possible way I could barely imagine myself.
blueboo 7y ago
People mostly aren't interested enough to actually learn how to tackle those problems nor resourceful enough to act on that learning. Ideas are cheap. That long-nursed startup idea you've had has been tried a half-dozen times and discarded even more.
dreamcompiler 7y ago
It's quite thin. I grew up surrounded by such people, but after college out in the real world I discovered that the number of people who were truly curious about the world was around 10%. Even more surprising to me: The percentage wasn't very much higher for people who had PhDs.