6 ms·

Um, not trying to put YOU down, but... What do you think the odds are that someone said something similar to Google when they started: "Gosh, guys. There are

Um, not trying to put YOU down, but... What do you think the odds are that someone said something similar to Google when they started: "Gosh, guys. There are 10 search engines out there with pretty good market share that have been iterating and improving their code/algorithms for YEARS. A "search engine" is one of those extremely complex businesses that requires years of practical experience to get right-- your "pagerank" concept looks alright at first glance but could turn out to be disastrous." Dramatic innovation can come from iteration and experience or it can come from unlikely sources (as startups prove over and over again). Personally, I think the OP's article is full of ideas that I decidedly don't agree with... But there are a vast pile of ridiculous ideas I didn't agree with in the past that turned out to be right.

swombat 18y ago
Larry and Sergei where high-achieving CS students at one of the world's leading universities, which also happens to be known for spawning all sorts of ground-breaking entrepreneurial ventures. That gives them at least some credibility. The concepts outlined in the OP are very basic, not ground-breaking at all. There is no hint of a reason why the OP should be even remotely believable. The whole thing sounds like puerile wishful thinking. To me, what it sounds like is a child designing his ideal car with an ice cream dispenser, and seeing how oh-my-god, it could also be used as an ice cream truck - win-win!.. That's what I was criticising. Harsh, perhaps - maybe even excessively so - but fair.