5 ms·
Tim O'Reilly: Stop throwing sheep, do something worthy
- ivankirigin 18y agoIn his Ignite Boston talk he basically said "startups are not where it's at. do something that matters"
- hugh 18y agoStartups, or only frivolous (sheep-throwing) startups?
- ivankirigin 18y agoIt was an overly broad statement, for sure
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- dfranke 18y agoI think Tim is behind the curve on this one and startups have already stepped up to this challenge. Startups that create social networks or other semi-frivolous toys have already had a stigma attached to them for at least a year now.
- quasimojo 18y agotell me a startup that is not creating a frivolous toy
- dfranke 18y agoWell, to choose the one that most obviously addresses Tim's challenge, CO2Stats.
- DaniFong 18y agoWe're aiming to create practical, beautiful, inexpensive compressed air powered vehicles.
- zhyder 18y ago(Warning: Following comment irrelevant to OP's subject.) Wow, that's amazing! There're so many interesting mechanical (and electro-mechanical) innovations on your Technology page. My appreciation for Hacker News just went up several notches since it's attracting folks like you. Are you funded? I hope so. Who else is building such stuff that isn't just computer science/engineering?
- DaniFong 18y agoWe're of course intending to raise funds. At this stage we're writing the business plan, putting together the engineering drawings, doing simulations, and sourcing components for the first prototype build. We'll be moving into fundraising mode soon.
- hugh 18y agoThat is both interesting and awesome. I just looked at your website. Good luck, and I hope you'll keep us all informed about your progress. (I'd buy one!)
- DabAsteroid 18y agoHave you looked at this?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_density_in_energy_storage_and_in_fuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_density_i... Energy density Energy density by mass (MJ/kg) by volume (MJ/L) Gasoline 46.9 34.6 Lithium ion battery 0.72 1.9 Lead acid battery 0.11 0.17 Compressed air in fiber-wound bottle at 200 bar (at 24°C) 0.1 0.1 compressed air in steel bottle at 200 bar (at 24°C) 0.04 0.1
- davidw 18y agoWith Hecl, I'm trying to make it easier for people to write programs for mobile phones. That is potentially a lot of people and a lot of programs.
- acangiano 18y ago> tell me a startup that is not creating a frivolous toy https://www.23andme.com/ https://www.23andme.com/
- azharcs 18y agoI totally agree with O'Reilly, Companies like Slide and RockYou do not deserve half a billion valuation and I am pretty much sure Max Levchin can do better than make social apps for Social-Networks.
- tptacek 18y agoHow do you decide what's worth half a billion dollars? If a social network app will drive half a billion dollars worth of advertising profit over N years, then it's worth half a billion dollars, even if the same effort is better spent combating malaria.
- jwilliams 18y agoI think he recognises that - the article quotes him as saying "I really believe in markets, and I believe in the power we all have to build great companies that change things.".
- azharcs 18y agoDo you really think SuperPoke or Top Friends has the potential to make a Billion, I really don't think so. Throwing a sheep or sending a drink is of no value, it might excite someone in short-term but it really has no value in long-term business sense.
- tptacek 18y agoThat's a silly argument. "Mad Men" is of no tangible value, but it drives a huge amount of advertising revenue.
- azharcs 18y agoYou are getting it wrong, We are talking about Half a Billion Dollar worth Businesses not some tv shows. Are these Companies or products worth the money they are valued at, Are they creating sustainable businesses and products and Are they helping or improving technology and community as a whole.
- snorkel 18y agoI am proud of not knowing what "throwing sheep" meant because it is Facebook related afterall.
- hugh 18y agoDo you also enjoy telling people that you don't watch television?
- Eliezer 18y agoTelevision rots the brain. Only watch anime on your computer monitor.
- gruseom 18y agoTelevision rots the brain Like crack cocaine! http://www.tvshowsondvd.net/graphics/news3/KiTHHat.jpg http://www.tvshowsondvd.net/graphics/news3/KiTHHat.jpg
- gruseom 18y agoOuch. Guess I'm the only Kids in the Hall fan here.
- menloparkbum 18y agoBig fan. Unfortunately, only over-the-hill Canadians (or near-Canadians) would catch the reference. I'll reimburse you one karma point.
- gruseom 18y agoUnfortunately, only over-the-hill Canadians Has it really come to that? :) Well, the reference was from the later crappier seasons.
- iigs 18y agoIf the iBeer thing is what I think it is, it's an application that will find you the nearest store to purchase beer when you tap the glass with your finger. I don't see how that's some scathing critique of the devolution of society, moreso than the phone itself at least. People can ignore what's going on in the world and contribute to the "downfall of society" or choose to live in a perpetual state of guilt about the success that the "first world" lives in at the moment, neither has a moral high ground. Your attitude doesn't matter -- but your contribution does. The fact that the US is losing its edge in technology has as much to do with the rest of the world catching up or exceeding where we are. That's not cause for tears and somber attitudes, that's the third world gaining prosperity and health, and the second world joining the first world party. The luddites and idiots have been a problem as long as there has been humanity; that they've been in a leadership role in the US is a minor anomoly at best, and a self solving problem at worst. I'm almost the perfect pessimist, but even I'm seeing the glass as half full at this point in history. Web 2.0's pretty overrated on the whole though -- maybe he could reclaim the conference time for something more useful.
- dmose 18y agoNo I think he's talking about the app that uses the accelerometer to simulate chugging a beer. That's it.
- Eliezer 18y agoI think a good rule of thumb at this point is to be extremely skeptical of anything advertising supported. If people won't pay you, are you really creating enough value to society to justify awarding yourself any warm fuzzies? I suppose exceptions could be made for services like Google, which people would pay $1000/year for if that's what all the providers charged, but which happen to be advertising-supported. "Make something people want enough to pay for." Now there's a terrifying heuristic.
- nostrademons 18y agoThis was exactly the common wisdom in 01/02. And then the economy turned around, and ad-supported was all the rage again. So you're right - now. But if you've got enough cash to wait out the downturn, ad-supported businesses could be very profitable. It's always a mistake to try and extrapolate the present out indefinitely...
- anthonyrubin 18y agoI don't think the question is whether or not you can run a profitable ad-supported business. The question is whether your product truly matters if people wouldn't pay for it. I believe there are ad-supported products that matter, but I'm tired of being advertised to. I will pay for good products.
- dejb 18y ago> I suppose exceptions could be made for services like Google, which people would pay $1000/year for if that's what all the providers charged Nobody would have paid $1000 a year for google. If they had started of trying to charge users then nobody would know about them. Most classes of online consumer apps are dominated by advertising supported models - search, email, social networking, social news, forums, productivity, etc. The transaction cost/hassle associated with paying is too large for most users to bother with.
- 13ren 18y agoIf we're headed for a depression: what business types flourished during the Great Depression? Is it really true that facilitating laughter and connection isn't worthy?
- hellfishburnsy 18y agoEntertainment flourished. People needed a way to forget their troubles, even if it's temporary.
- yters 18y agoEscapist entertainment only helps proliferate troubles. We need entertainment that improves us too. Classically, it was thought the two go hand in hand.
- quasimojo 18y agowhat business types flourished during the Great Depression? repo men
- nostrademons 18y agoAlcohol & cigarettes. Board games. Movies. Also automobiles, radio, defense.
- bokonist 18y agoThe other day I had a crazy realization. If you add up the actual labor time required to create a lifetime's worth of standard goods and services, you get something like 5-10 man years. You can do something "worthy" that makes humans more productive, but since we are already so productive it doesn't make a huge difference. The $64,000 question is, if technology has increased our productivity so much over the past 50 years, why are we actually working more hours, and liking our jobs less? Why aren't we all retiring at 30 to do what we love?
- alexkay 18y agoBecause "standard goods and services" are redefined as productivity increases. 20 years ago we couldn't afford half the stuff that is "standard" now.
- quasimojo 18y agoAMEN. go into any food bank and ask the "clients" how many of them have cable tv and cell phones with data plans
- bokonist 18y agoFood is considerably more expensive than cable tv and cell phones.
- quasimojo 18y agoFood is considerably more expensive than cable tv and cell phones. you're changing the topic. the point is that people's baseline expectations keep rising. your point is spurious because you reason that because a month's worth of food costs more than a month of cable tv, one should not sacrifice cable tv for food
- anamax 18y agoCable TV is about $100/month. Let's call it $25/week or $3/day. Yuppie beans are around $3/pound, so $1/day should do for protein. Carbs in the form of rice or potatoes are cheaper. Veggies and fruit are about the same. In other words, food can be about as expensive as cable tv.
- ojbyrne 18y agoWhile reading the part - "and certainly aren't helping the environment by distributing tons of press kits and swag--not to mention flying in hundreds of attendees in a massive spurt of carbon emissions." - I got the feeling that the author wanted to continue on to say O'Reilly makes his money selling dead trees, but stopped short.
- aditya 18y agoHere's the video: http://blip.tv/play/AbTEA4a8DQ http://blip.tv/play/AbTEA4a8DQ
- quasimojo 18y agothe market will sort it out. have any of the yc guys gotten rich lately? in the end, no one but the franciscans is really interested in a vow of poverty. beyond seed capital it doesn't even seem that rockyou and slide are swimming in cash. from yelp to loopt to twitter...at some point it will be put up or shut up on the revenue side.
- wensing 18y agoThis summary is more robust: http://greensear.ch/2008/09/18/tim-oreilly-keynote-at-the-web-20-expo/ http://greensear.ch/2008/09/18/tim-oreilly-keynote-at-the-we... And I found out through a Google Alert that O'Reilly mentioned Stormpulse.
- rgrieselhuber 18y agoIn reading some of the comments here, I wonder if O'Reilly's point is being addressed? Most of the focus in the comments is on what makes a viable business model (ad-supported vs. pay-for-use) or a rational valuation (is Slide really worth half a billion?), but my reading made me think that O'Reilly was trying to get people focus on something bigger, specifically, is what you're working on worthwhile? Like, if you got hit by a bus tomorrow, will you consider your life well-spent to have built that sheep thrower when you could have been doing something else?
- bbgm 18y agoHe was definitely emphasizing a focus on something "bigger" and a shift away from many of the current crop of apps/startups. Can't say I disagree with him either. There are so many smart people out there. We can definitely do more.
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- jamescoops 18y agohe is echoing bubblegeneration.com
- thomasmallen 18y agoYou can't funnel creativity. For every satellite we send to Mars, there will be 20,000 things like SuperPoke and iBeer, and that's not a problem.
- time_management 18y agoAmen. For all the buzz about "Facebook apps", has anyone looked at most of these things? Bug-ridden, ugly, utter shit. Facebook is slouching toward the Gomorrah of clutter. I hope something better comes along. I never liked Facebook (originally Thefacebook, lulz-on-a-vomit-pie) or that Zuckerberg clown, and I only use it because my friends do. Sheep-throwing is a case of the exception attempting to drive the rule. SuperPoke is a mediocre idea that has achieved some measure of viral success. It makes "success" (high user count) look easy, and that's a catchy idea to many people. Does the "Million Dollar Homepage" really scale? Of course not, but it's an attractive idea that some kid out there can make $1m from a mediocre, one-flash concept. With the right infrastructure and some luck, mediocre ideas can lead to smashing success, even reliably. Take the board game Monopoly. The design of the game is quite primitive; not nearly on the level of Settlers of Catan, much less Tigris and Euphrates or Puerto Rico. But mass-producing and marketing a board game during the Great Depression was not easy, and there was a high barrier to entry, so the designer who was able to surmount this barrier was able to collect. Now that the barrier to entry for most ideas is low, the mediocre ideas that achieve lasting success are going to be very rare. In terms of the money and talent being wasted on mediocre ideas, one source of this problem is inherent to the VC culture. MBAs, by definition, are risk-averse people. It's an incredibly risk-averse move to trade two years and $100,000 (if you have, or can borrow, the money) for an assurance of elevated career status. Elite MBA programs are, compared to similar law, medical, or PhD programs, extremely unselective, and getting an MBA is a way to reach the executive level by (wait for it) schmoozing and taking classes-- in other words, without accomplishing or risking anything. To the extent that most VCs are elite MBAs, of course they're going to be throwing their money after me-too social networking sites, which can be compared to other such sites on paper-- rather than original ideas that only the marketplace can evaluate. Investing money in social networking and "Web 2.0" is like buying the proverbial IBM, for which nobody was ever fired.
- HeyLaughingBoy 18y agoIn a way, I hate to say it because I'm the kind of person who always thinks that people should do with their time or resources whatever they damn well please. BUT I wonder the same thing all the time: why are all these smart people spending their effort on yet another social/media website when there are so many other profitable or meaningful businesses to start.
- Tichy 18y agoSo basically, creating games is not worthy? How about creating art, or creating music? Writing novels?