6 ms·

JL: Why I Do YC

130 points by theoneill 18y ago

wumi 18y ago
JL: are there any specific people or companies (that have come through the YC pipeline) that you are most proud of? (or maybe this is too much like picking favorites)
- jl 18y ago
  I don't think I should pick favorites. But it would be difficult even if I wanted to, since I've seen so many of the founders overcome big challenges.
edw519 18y ago
In a startup, you choose to work with people you think are talented. At a big company, you're stuck working with whoever else they've hired. What a great observation. So obvious, yet hardly ever mentioned. I'd add... In a startup, you choose to work on what you want, how you want. At a big company, you're stuck working on whatever they want, however they want it.
- crescendo 18y ago
  In a startup, you choose to work on what you want, how you want. This depends on what kind of startup and also what stage it's in. In our case, my partner and I are still in the mode of trying to break away from consulting work to develop our own products.
- tx 18y ago
  With all due respect, I am growing a bit tired of deliberate avoiding startup pitfalls, when we talk about them here on HN. Yes, I much prefer working in a small company for all these glorified (and popular here) reasons but it doesn't mean startups are good for everybody. In fact I believe startups do not appeal to real hackers, guys who we quote and admire. My limited personal experience confirms this too: smart people I know work at IBM, Motorola, Google and Microsoft and they're HAPPY. And this is why: Let's face it: in a startup, most often than not you're working on something trivial, technically simple, something that can be "released often, released early". Some minor "incremental improvement", and you've got PG books saying "it's OK". At a startup you (most probably) will be working on something that most of your friends will call "stupid shit" behind your back. Let's not pretend this elephant isn't there. There are exceptions to every rule, but it's a rule nevertheless. And this is something I miss the most: an opportunity to work on hard problems, not necessarily even succeeding: this is why startups almost never try. And this is why my ideal "exit strategy" is to cash out (some day) and spend my days in academia. Wow... This was very sudden (even for me) and perhaps misplaced rant.
  - pg 18y ago
    There seems a bit of a contradiction here. You say that real hackers wouldn't work on startups-- that the really smart people are in academia. And yet a large percentage of the CS faculty at MIT and Stanford have done or are doing startups. There's a joke that you can't get tenure at Stanford without having done a startup. You're also confusing exploratory programming with doing trivial work. Making a quick version 1 and then iterating works for both big and small problems. It just depends how long you keep iterating. It's true that a lot of the work you do in startups is crap work, and that a lot of startups only take on trivial problems. But this is also true in research.
    - tx 18y ago
      Perhaps I haven't framed my confusion into a proper verbal frame, but there were quite a few books in my life screaming "try this!", and I was unable to find time/application for them in this crazy-fast pace of startup life. Startups I worked in were all hungry, fast and aggressive predators, consuming other people's code (open source), other people's research, algorithms and even ideas for products. I haven't been inside of something genuinely new, let alone doing my own, truly mine, thing. What I've done, and companies I was a part of, was just that - a bunch of incremental improvements based on 4-6 months release cycle. How can I be not sad about that?
      - timr 18y ago
        Nearly every scientist I know is doing "a bunch of incremental improvements based on a 4-6 month release cycle". They just call the results of the releases "publications".
      - dbrush 18y ago
        "I haven't been inside of something genuinely new, let alone doing my own, truly mine, thing." That is why what you're saying here and in the above is a rant rather than advice. "You've gotta try, because if you haven't tried then you haven't lived."
      - gruseom 18y ago
- hello_moto 18y ago
  I don't want to sound negative, but that sentence can also be reversed: "I can't work well with other people. Therefore, I must choose wisely whom I should work with..." For sure, most of the time you're the only person you can work well with. At a big company, you learn how to work with other people whether they're considered "match" or "not-match" with you. It's a life-lesson how to treat people regardless their attitude. I'm currently working at a startup that is owned by someone else. I'm still stuck working on whatever my boss asked me to do, and however my boss wants it.
- culley 18y ago
  psst... I work at a large corporation. I choose who I work with. I choose my own projects. I work 40 hours a week for a good salary. I have good health care (in America). I do have to describe my projects in terms that matter to my corporation, but how is that any different than pitching to VCs?
danielha 18y ago
And you can really feel all of that sentiment when working with Jessica and the rest of Y Combinator. They're not just doing it because it's the next-generation, paradigm-shifting, game-changing micro-investment model (I call that buzzword-dashing). It's also one of the reasons why, with all these similar funds cropping up, YC cannot be completely duplicated.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- gruseom 18y ago
  It could be duplicated a lot better if people didn't drop the most important thing, which to my mind is the part about helping creative people make better lives for themselves than the default paths through the soulless wasteland usually afford. I wondered for a bit if this was unfair. Motivation isn't something you can turn on or off, so it's not within the duplicators' control to duplicate that. But it is within their control to observe better. If I were going to make a YC clone and I didn't have that piece, I'd think twice about bothering. Incidentally, I'm just basing this on what I've read. I haven't met any of the people involved.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
gruseom 18y ago
I spent 13 years in corporate America, mostly because I didn't understand what my other options were. I was hypnotized... I don't want young people to endure corporate America like I did if they don't want to. I find these statements very moving. Perhaps it's because they speak simply from deep experience.
- hello_moto 18y ago
  The same can be said to "startup in America". "I spent x years working for various [failed] startups, mostly because I hoped to get rich and to avoid corporate Americas. I was hypnotized... I don't want young people to endure [working for 80 hours and eating ramen] at startups like I did if they don't want to".
  - gruseom 18y ago
    It can be said, but I disagree that the statement has the same significance either way. Of course you can hypnotize yourself about startup environments too - I was just commenting on this (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=237891 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=237891). But nearly all the enormous pressure of social conformity is on the other side, so the hypnotic pull of the corporate mainstream has no counterpart here. Many people believe they have no choice but to work at a corporate job. Far fewer believe they have no choice but to work at a startup. Also, we're not talking about having a startup job. We're talking about founding a startup around something you yourself find creatively fulfilling, something that is worth eating ramen for. That's a big difference. Eating ramen to fulfill somebody else's dream (and I've done that) doesn't feel very good. We're talking about being free to do work of one's own - and to own one's work.
    - hello_moto 18y ago
      I have to disagree with your statement that many believes they have no choice. I thought the whole startups, small business, one-man business stuffs have been published like mad lately by the like of Fast Company, Entrepreneur, Inc., Wall Street Journal, NY Times, Washington Post, TechCrunch, etc.
rguzman 18y ago
I felt a little sanctimonious afterward (since I definitely hope YC doesn't turn out to be a non-profit) I realize that this is sensitive information and you guys may not want to share, but I'll ask anyway. Has YC broken even, yet? Is it close? Nowhere near?
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  The general vibe I've always gotten is that it roughly breaks even, so far. Jessica and pg have both asserted this in the past, in articles or in conversation. But, that was a year ago...and with Loopt still iterating and signing on new providers and creating new services, Xobni still growing and getting pretty monstrous press, and at least two or three other potential IPOs (or at least >$50 million acquisitions) in the making, it's definitely too early to say what kind of money YC will make. If I were an investor, there are several former YC companies that I would like a stake in, even at a valuation much higher than what YC bought in at. The average exit in the valley, according to one of the speakers at Startup School this year, happens seven years after founding. On that timescale, all of the YC companies are still very young.
  - hello_moto 18y ago
    Only time will tell if these young-ins have the patience to wait that long (7 years).
    - SwellJoe 18y ago
      Who says they're "waiting"? I would think "work that long" would be a more appropriate way to put it, as merely waiting won't get a company to an exit no matter how long you wait. Anyway, the ones that wanted a quick exit have generally already had them, or given up and gone to work for someone else. There have been five or six YC exits, so far, and all of them count as "early cheap" exits (though most of them are now "rich" by some definition of rich, they were still merely high six to low eight figure exits)...the companies that are still in business and haven't been acquired after two or three years obviously have bigger plans. In the past couple of months, I've talked to three YC companies that have had acquisition offers but have turned them down.
echamussy 18y ago
I come from a country where there is very little investment in technology and almost no innovation happening. I hope one day I will have the financial freedom to do something similar to YC there because I strongly believe there are many talented people waiting for opportunities and so many places where technology and innovation could be extremely helpful. So I just want to say thanks for what YC does. It changes people's lives and inspires others which I believe is something extremely satisfying and something to feel immensely proud of.

130 points by theoneill 18y ago

wumi 18y ago

JL: are there any specific people or companies (that have come through the YC pipeline) that you are most proud of? (or maybe this is too much like picking favorites)

jl 18y ago
I don't think I should pick favorites. But it would be difficult even if I wanted to, since I've seen so many of the founders overcome big challenges.

edw519 18y ago

In a startup, you choose to work with people you think are talented. At a big company, you're stuck working with whoever else they've hired. What a great observation. So obvious, yet hardly ever mentioned. I'd add... In a startup, you choose to work on what you want, how you want. At a big company, you're stuck working on whatever they want, however they want it.

crescendo 18y ago
In a startup, you choose to work on what you want, how you want. This depends on what kind of startup and also what stage it's in. In our case, my partner and I are still in the mode of trying to break away from consulting work to develop our own products.
tx 18y ago
With all due respect, I am growing a bit tired of deliberate avoiding startup pitfalls, when we talk about them here on HN. Yes, I much prefer working in a small company for all these glorified (and popular here) reasons but it doesn't mean startups are good for everybody. In fact I believe startups do not appeal to real hackers, guys who we quote and admire. My limited personal experience confirms this too: smart people I know work at IBM, Motorola, Google and Microsoft and they're HAPPY. And this is why: Let's face it: in a startup, most often than not you're working on something trivial, technically simple, something that can be "released often, released early". Some minor "incremental improvement", and you've got PG books saying "it's OK". At a startup you (most probably) will be working on something that most of your friends will call "stupid shit" behind your back. Let's not pretend this elephant isn't there. There are exceptions to every rule, but it's a rule nevertheless. And this is something I miss the most: an opportunity to work on hard problems, not necessarily even succeeding: this is why startups almost never try. And this is why my ideal "exit strategy" is to cash out (some day) and spend my days in academia. Wow... This was very sudden (even for me) and perhaps misplaced rant.
- pg 18y ago
  There seems a bit of a contradiction here. You say that real hackers wouldn't work on startups-- that the really smart people are in academia. And yet a large percentage of the CS faculty at MIT and Stanford have done or are doing startups. There's a joke that you can't get tenure at Stanford without having done a startup. You're also confusing exploratory programming with doing trivial work. Making a quick version 1 and then iterating works for both big and small problems. It just depends how long you keep iterating. It's true that a lot of the work you do in startups is crap work, and that a lot of startups only take on trivial problems. But this is also true in research.
  - tx 18y ago
    Perhaps I haven't framed my confusion into a proper verbal frame, but there were quite a few books in my life screaming "try this!", and I was unable to find time/application for them in this crazy-fast pace of startup life. Startups I worked in were all hungry, fast and aggressive predators, consuming other people's code (open source), other people's research, algorithms and even ideas for products. I haven't been inside of something genuinely new, let alone doing my own, truly mine, thing. What I've done, and companies I was a part of, was just that - a bunch of incremental improvements based on 4-6 months release cycle. How can I be not sad about that?
    - timr 18y ago
      Nearly every scientist I know is doing "a bunch of incremental improvements based on a 4-6 month release cycle". They just call the results of the releases "publications".
    - dbrush 18y ago
      "I haven't been inside of something genuinely new, let alone doing my own, truly mine, thing." That is why what you're saying here and in the above is a rant rather than advice. "You've gotta try, because if you haven't tried then you haven't lived."
    - gruseom 18y ago
hello_moto 18y ago
I don't want to sound negative, but that sentence can also be reversed: "I can't work well with other people. Therefore, I must choose wisely whom I should work with..." For sure, most of the time you're the only person you can work well with. At a big company, you learn how to work with other people whether they're considered "match" or "not-match" with you. It's a life-lesson how to treat people regardless their attitude. I'm currently working at a startup that is owned by someone else. I'm still stuck working on whatever my boss asked me to do, and however my boss wants it.
culley 18y ago
psst... I work at a large corporation. I choose who I work with. I choose my own projects. I work 40 hours a week for a good salary. I have good health care (in America). I do have to describe my projects in terms that matter to my corporation, but how is that any different than pitching to VCs?

danielha 18y ago

And you can really feel all of that sentiment when working with Jessica and the rest of Y Combinator. They're not just doing it because it's the next-generation, paradigm-shifting, game-changing micro-investment model (I call that buzzword-dashing). It's also one of the reasons why, with all these similar funds cropping up, YC cannot be completely duplicated.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
gruseom 18y ago
It could be duplicated a lot better if people didn't drop the most important thing, which to my mind is the part about helping creative people make better lives for themselves than the default paths through the soulless wasteland usually afford. I wondered for a bit if this was unfair. Motivation isn't something you can turn on or off, so it's not within the duplicators' control to duplicate that. But it is within their control to observe better. If I were going to make a YC clone and I didn't have that piece, I'd think twice about bothering. Incidentally, I'm just basing this on what I've read. I haven't met any of the people involved.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]

gruseom 18y ago

I spent 13 years in corporate America, mostly because I didn't understand what my other options were. I was hypnotized... I don't want young people to endure corporate America like I did if they don't want to. I find these statements very moving. Perhaps it's because they speak simply from deep experience.

hello_moto 18y ago
The same can be said to "startup in America". "I spent x years working for various [failed] startups, mostly because I hoped to get rich and to avoid corporate Americas. I was hypnotized... I don't want young people to endure [working for 80 hours and eating ramen] at startups like I did if they don't want to".
- gruseom 18y ago
  It can be said, but I disagree that the statement has the same significance either way. Of course you can hypnotize yourself about startup environments too - I was just commenting on this (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=237891 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=237891). But nearly all the enormous pressure of social conformity is on the other side, so the hypnotic pull of the corporate mainstream has no counterpart here. Many people believe they have no choice but to work at a corporate job. Far fewer believe they have no choice but to work at a startup. Also, we're not talking about having a startup job. We're talking about founding a startup around something you yourself find creatively fulfilling, something that is worth eating ramen for. That's a big difference. Eating ramen to fulfill somebody else's dream (and I've done that) doesn't feel very good. We're talking about being free to do work of one's own - and to own one's work.
  - hello_moto 18y ago
    I have to disagree with your statement that many believes they have no choice. I thought the whole startups, small business, one-man business stuffs have been published like mad lately by the like of Fast Company, Entrepreneur, Inc., Wall Street Journal, NY Times, Washington Post, TechCrunch, etc.

rguzman 18y ago

I felt a little sanctimonious afterward (since I definitely hope YC doesn't turn out to be a non-profit) I realize that this is sensitive information and you guys may not want to share, but I'll ask anyway. Has YC broken even, yet? Is it close? Nowhere near?

SwellJoe 18y ago
The general vibe I've always gotten is that it roughly breaks even, so far. Jessica and pg have both asserted this in the past, in articles or in conversation. But, that was a year ago...and with Loopt still iterating and signing on new providers and creating new services, Xobni still growing and getting pretty monstrous press, and at least two or three other potential IPOs (or at least >$50 million acquisitions) in the making, it's definitely too early to say what kind of money YC will make. If I were an investor, there are several former YC companies that I would like a stake in, even at a valuation much higher than what YC bought in at. The average exit in the valley, according to one of the speakers at Startup School this year, happens seven years after founding. On that timescale, all of the YC companies are still very young.
- hello_moto 18y ago
  Only time will tell if these young-ins have the patience to wait that long (7 years).
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    Who says they're "waiting"? I would think "work that long" would be a more appropriate way to put it, as merely waiting won't get a company to an exit no matter how long you wait. Anyway, the ones that wanted a quick exit have generally already had them, or given up and gone to work for someone else. There have been five or six YC exits, so far, and all of them count as "early cheap" exits (though most of them are now "rich" by some definition of rich, they were still merely high six to low eight figure exits)...the companies that are still in business and haven't been acquired after two or three years obviously have bigger plans. In the past couple of months, I've talked to three YC companies that have had acquisition offers but have turned them down.

echamussy 18y ago

I come from a country where there is very little investment in technology and almost no innovation happening. I hope one day I will have the financial freedom to do something similar to YC there because I strongly believe there are many talented people waiting for opportunities and so many places where technology and innovation could be extremely helpful. So I just want to say thanks for what YC does. It changes people's lives and inspires others which I believe is something extremely satisfying and something to feel immensely proud of.