6 ms·

HN comments are hilarious. Someone who has created the first internet browser, built two companies worth $4.3B and $1.6B, and then a $30B VC firm doesn't have "

HN comments are hilarious. Someone who has created the first internet browser, built two companies worth $4.3B and $1.6B, and then a $30B VC firm doesn't have "the same intellectual and "lived-life" weight of your run-of-the-mills 9-to-5 office worker."

bigcat12345678 4y ago
If you believe the money amount correspondence to intellectual and lived life weight is linear, then Marc must be astronomical huge. But in the end, no one knows the correspondence between money amount and intellectual and lived life weight. That's a market thing. Everyone's option is mixed together and give to a weight of collective market dynamism.
CalChris 4y ago
Netscape Navigator wasn't the first internet browser. It wasn't the second either. It came along in 1994, four years after Tim Berners-Lee introduced the WorldWideWeb browser.
- steego 4y ago
  That’s true, but Netscape wasn’t his first browser. He and Eric Bina also releasedd the first version of Mosaic in 1993, which was the first graphical browser to inline images with the text. Oh yeah, it ran on 5 operating systems (I used the OS/2 version myself) The breadth of features that were added between Netscape 1.0 and Netscape 3.0 in 2 year span was pretty astounding at that time. People forget how many critical features were added to Netscape 3.0 that would define so much of the web today and make it commercially viable.
- wpietri 4y ago
  And the company only lasted a few years! Good for him on being in the right place at the right time and jumping on the opportunity. But if we're going to use it as a yardstick of his genius, surely we have to also look at how it turned out.
jjulius 4y ago
Generating value/wealth != intellectualism
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Right. Most “intellectuals” never produce anything of value.
  - wittycardio 4y ago
    But they are a hell of a lot smarter than VCs
rtpg 4y ago
Success doesn't just magically cross all elements of human life! The most visible SV VCs don't do themselves any favors. Granting the "I can built a successful company" component, there are many who then claim to understand society, politics, philosophy, and everything in between. Then they loudly talk about their opinions. And then people see it, and think "wow, not super smart huh". The cherry on the cake is how many of these VC people get mad about cancel culture, cuz it turns out that social media means they have way more people calling them stupid to their face (an experience they likely don't have in their day to day life, as the person with the money/firing capabilities). (To be fair I also don't have people calling me stupid to my face and it sounds unpleasant) Of course there are many VCs who don't play this game, don't pretend to have seen behind the curtain of the universe, and people don't make fun of them on Twitter. And many of those people are plenty successful and fine. But there are a couple who become the butt of jokes because they like saying the name Socrates
- rchaud 4y ago
  > Of course there are many VCs who don't play this game, don't pretend to have seen behind the curtain of the universe, and people don't make fun of them on Twitter. And many of those people are plenty successful and fine. That might be Ben Horowitz, the titular partner at A16Z. His Twitter is relatively quiet, mostly just retweeting other A16Z people's tweets. In his book "The Hard Thing About Hard Things", every chapter begins with a rap lyric from golden-age era hiphop (80s, 90s). It's quite ridiculous contrasting lyrics about street life and hustling to Horowitz's tales of trying to build enterprise unicorns. But in book format, it comes off as well-meaning tribute from a fan and not a cynical way of conflating the struggles of the American poor with say Loudcloud going through a down round. But on Twitter, which is combative to begin with, him quoting Nas or Jay-Z while bloviating about Web3 would invite derision right away.
aaronbrethorst 4y ago
I like how none of these other replies have picked up on your employment as a VC yet.
djitz 4y ago
I suppose this is the pseudo-intellectual version of Monday morning quarterbacking.
sanderjd 4y ago
I dunno, I was pretty skeptical of the comment at first along similar lines as your comment, but then as I went I felt that the comment ended up making some pretty compelling points.
borroka 4y ago
I found that as hilarious myself. A VC whose firm is the one who has been pushing the hardest for web3, cypto-fund, Chris Dixon etc., who when asked, seriously this time, not by people who are boot-licking on the basis of the billions made, what web3 is for, cannot articulate an answer that goes beyond a word salad with no dressing. On the basis of those very famous billions, should he be allowed a pass anytime he says nonsense? He is an amazing technologist, but it appears to me that when he, and many other VCs, go beyond the boundaries of their technical expertise, they know as much as the guy who get their news from twitter. Their fame and worth sometimes prevent me from commenting on their nonsense on Twitter because I say to myself, who am I to criticize someone who moves billions? I got the same vibe from a few too many CEO, CTO, and other assorted C- of big and famous companies. The CTO of my previous company, which had a total number of employees greater than 150,000 heads, was terribly underwhelming any time they decided to give their opinion on current business, and the future of the business and of the technology supporting the business. But they were never criticized because they were the CTO of a company of 150,000 people and therefore inherently extraordinary. The principle of authority does not work in science and works a bit more (too much!) in business because the authority can move the market, but not because the authority is right. It is fine, of course, nobody is a genius everywhere, and as the comment said, he has been incredibly successful, 10,000 more than I have been. But some people, for the worship they get, are more disappointing than others when they show their true, and not assumed, intellectual range.

bigcat12345678 4y ago

If you believe the money amount correspondence to intellectual and lived life weight is linear, then Marc must be astronomical huge. But in the end, no one knows the correspondence between money amount and intellectual and lived life weight. That's a market thing. Everyone's option is mixed together and give to a weight of collective market dynamism.

CalChris 4y ago

Netscape Navigator wasn't the first internet browser. It wasn't the second either. It came along in 1994, four years after Tim Berners-Lee introduced the WorldWideWeb browser.

steego 4y ago
That’s true, but Netscape wasn’t his first browser. He and Eric Bina also releasedd the first version of Mosaic in 1993, which was the first graphical browser to inline images with the text. Oh yeah, it ran on 5 operating systems (I used the OS/2 version myself) The breadth of features that were added between Netscape 1.0 and Netscape 3.0 in 2 year span was pretty astounding at that time. People forget how many critical features were added to Netscape 3.0 that would define so much of the web today and make it commercially viable.
wpietri 4y ago
And the company only lasted a few years! Good for him on being in the right place at the right time and jumping on the opportunity. But if we're going to use it as a yardstick of his genius, surely we have to also look at how it turned out.

jjulius 4y ago

Generating value/wealth != intellectualism

throwaway894345 4y ago
Right. Most “intellectuals” never produce anything of value.
- wittycardio 4y ago
  But they are a hell of a lot smarter than VCs

rtpg 4y ago

Success doesn't just magically cross all elements of human life! The most visible SV VCs don't do themselves any favors. Granting the "I can built a successful company" component, there are many who then claim to understand society, politics, philosophy, and everything in between. Then they loudly talk about their opinions. And then people see it, and think "wow, not super smart huh". The cherry on the cake is how many of these VC people get mad about cancel culture, cuz it turns out that social media means they have way more people calling them stupid to their face (an experience they likely don't have in their day to day life, as the person with the money/firing capabilities). (To be fair I also don't have people calling me stupid to my face and it sounds unpleasant) Of course there are many VCs who don't play this game, don't pretend to have seen behind the curtain of the universe, and people don't make fun of them on Twitter. And many of those people are plenty successful and fine. But there are a couple who become the butt of jokes because they like saying the name Socrates

rchaud 4y ago
> Of course there are many VCs who don't play this game, don't pretend to have seen behind the curtain of the universe, and people don't make fun of them on Twitter. And many of those people are plenty successful and fine. That might be Ben Horowitz, the titular partner at A16Z. His Twitter is relatively quiet, mostly just retweeting other A16Z people's tweets. In his book "The Hard Thing About Hard Things", every chapter begins with a rap lyric from golden-age era hiphop (80s, 90s). It's quite ridiculous contrasting lyrics about street life and hustling to Horowitz's tales of trying to build enterprise unicorns. But in book format, it comes off as well-meaning tribute from a fan and not a cynical way of conflating the struggles of the American poor with say Loudcloud going through a down round. But on Twitter, which is combative to begin with, him quoting Nas or Jay-Z while bloviating about Web3 would invite derision right away.

aaronbrethorst 4y ago

I like how none of these other replies have picked up on your employment as a VC yet.

djitz 4y ago

I suppose this is the pseudo-intellectual version of Monday morning quarterbacking.

sanderjd 4y ago

I dunno, I was pretty skeptical of the comment at first along similar lines as your comment, but then as I went I felt that the comment ended up making some pretty compelling points.

borroka 4y ago

I found that as hilarious myself. A VC whose firm is the one who has been pushing the hardest for web3, cypto-fund, Chris Dixon etc., who when asked, seriously this time, not by people who are boot-licking on the basis of the billions made, what web3 is for, cannot articulate an answer that goes beyond a word salad with no dressing. On the basis of those very famous billions, should he be allowed a pass anytime he says nonsense? He is an amazing technologist, but it appears to me that when he, and many other VCs, go beyond the boundaries of their technical expertise, they know as much as the guy who get their news from twitter. Their fame and worth sometimes prevent me from commenting on their nonsense on Twitter because I say to myself, who am I to criticize someone who moves billions? I got the same vibe from a few too many CEO, CTO, and other assorted C- of big and famous companies. The CTO of my previous company, which had a total number of employees greater than 150,000 heads, was terribly underwhelming any time they decided to give their opinion on current business, and the future of the business and of the technology supporting the business. But they were never criticized because they were the CTO of a company of 150,000 people and therefore inherently extraordinary. The principle of authority does not work in science and works a bit more (too much!) in business because the authority can move the market, but not because the authority is right. It is fine, of course, nobody is a genius everywhere, and as the comment said, he has been incredibly successful, 10,000 more than I have been. But some people, for the worship they get, are more disappointing than others when they show their true, and not assumed, intellectual range.