5 ms·

Out of the 3 "Insight Porn" examples linked in the article, I think the Paul Graham essay seems out of place. I know I know, this is hacker news. Yet another pe

Out of the 3 "Insight Porn" examples linked in the article, I think the Paul Graham essay seems out of place. I know I know, this is hacker news. Yet another person sticking up for pg. But I just don't think this essay (or others) is really trying to boil some dream/goal into steps. In fact, in the "How to get startup ideas" referenced in this post, pg says: "So if you can't predict whether there's a path out of an idea, how do you choose between ideas? The truth is disappointing but interesting: if you're the right sort of person, you have the right sort of hunches. If you're at the leading edge of a field that's changing fast, when you have a hunch that something is worth doing, you're more likely to be right." To me, he is doing the opposite of insight porn. Basically saying this might not even be for you. He doesn't even suggest that you go become an expert in something. Rather, he just throws his hands up. He tries to spare you from the disappointment of hearing this by calling it "interesting". That contrasts _a lot_ with what most of the insight porn is trying to convince you of. They rarely try to disappoint you and mostly just hype/pump you up.

feet 4y ago
To me that sounds like "you need insight into a field to have good hunches"
lumost 4y ago
Consider how ineffective this advice is then. What decisions can you make? You could take this to mean that you should follow your gut, or not. Does it share anything useful for formulating a decision? And why is this approach better than the alternatives?
- startupdiscuss 4y ago
  The point is, this was not meant to be advice! This was anti-advice. You can't use the criterion: if it is insightful it has to be actionable on an insight that says "I have no actions for you". The difference is, it is not trying to trick you.
  - jasonwatkinspdx 4y ago
    It's just empty self aggrandizement. "Be the right sort of person and you'll have the right hunches" is transparent nonsense.
    - tomhoward 4y ago
      It's not nonsense, it's an obviously-tautological statement, made with the full awareness that it's not helpful advice, but used to explain the point. It's one sentence out of a long essay. Later in the essay he provides recipes for coming up with startup ideas, even though he warns that that approach is suboptimal. What more could be asked of him?
    - ProblemFactory 4y ago
      It's not empty, it's just way, way! too politely phrased. It's not advice on how to find ideas or how to become that person, but advice on who is ready to give founding a startup a try. During my career I did freelance mobile app and web development for about 10 years. In that time I came across many people who wanted to found a tech startup because "that's where the money is" and being a tech startup founder being a status symbol. Some enthusiastic youngsters, but mostly people who had a successful non-tech small business. And they were not the right sort of person and did not have the right hunches, they didn't use what they learned from their non-tech business, but instead sat down over a beer with friends to brainstorm "social-local-viral" app ideas. The advice instead should be that if you are struggling to come up with startup ideas, you probably aren't the right sort of person at this time. You should do something entirely different for a while until you find a product that just has to exist. Unfortunately, they had never read HN or PG, nor could I do more than politely refuse their business.
- tomhoward 4y ago
  The problem with the OP's criticism and yours is that it starts from the assumption that PG has set out to "sell" the reader faux-actionable insights. What he's really doing is answering the question "how can I come up with startup ideas?", which has always been asked of him and the other YC partners frequently. And his answer is: you shouldn't try to come up with startup ideas; that's not how it works. Instead you should just notice if/when they appear before you. He's clearly not claiming to be doing what the author is accusing him of trying to do. He's just explaining something he'd noticed after (at that time) 7 years of funding/advising some of the most successful startups. (That said, later in the essay he goes on to offer actionable recipes for formulating startup ideas anyway). In answer to your question: you can take his advice, or not, to stop trying to confect startup ideas, and instead just pay attention to the opportunities you notice from your own experience.
  - planarhobbit 4y ago
    This is why I don’t get the recent pg hate that’s been happening on HN. He’s always done this, but now people are saying he’s out of touch because he’s rich/white/old. Majority of things he’s blogged are no-nonsense observations.
    - trwhite 4y ago
      I think one has to take his writing of late with a pinch of salt because he writes things that only a rich, white and old guy could write. But the earlier stuff is still great. Hackers & Painters is still a wonderful book.
redler 4y ago
It’s the “some of us just have midichlorians” insight.
flatline 4y ago
> If you're at the leading edge of a field that's changing fast, when you have a hunch that something is worth doing, you're more likely to be right. Right there he suggests you become an expert. An expert who is at the crest of the wave in some field is more likely to see over it and get a glimpse of what’s next. I think he is spot on. It’s no guarantee but it’s probably as close as you can get.
015a 4y ago
I think it does belong; ultimately, knowing if one has the "right sort of hunches" is only possible in hindsight, there's as much luck as anything else involved in what PG/VCs/founders do, and they in-no-uncertain-terms admit this through their their entire model of investment; throwing money at 100 companies praying that one 1000x's. Just as how its easy to criticize ideas because criticism is cheap, its also easy to pick out if a business will probably fail; but singling out success is near-impossible. If you asked me if playing video games all day was a good way to get the brain-surgeon-rocket-engineering job of your dreams, I'd say it probably isn't; but the right way is far more elusive. In other words, its high level, not useful, and once you get into the specifics his message falls apart. I also think: VCs are generally quick to trivialize the impact the rising economic tide of the '10s had on all investments, not the least of all in the novelty of software-related venture investments, and many people will be found without pants over the next decade. Which I only say to add that this is a common theme with insight porn; trivializing luck & privilege.
vharuck 4y ago
>"if you're the right sort of person, you have the right sort of hunches" To me, this sounds like a line from a multi-level marketing pitch. It sounds like they're saying "This may not apply to you," but a lot of people will hear "There are chosen people (and you're probably one of them)." It reminds me of the Calvinism sect of Christianity. They believed in predestination for salvation: God has always known who be a good person and deserve salvation. So there was no point in trying to be virtuous, because the outcome was set before you were born. Still, Calvinists often adopted public shows of virtue, like meticulous gardens, to convince others they were part of the "to be saved" group.
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  Yeah, but there's always someone who will misinterpret you. You can try to mitigate it, but at some point you have to stop worrying about it and just be honest. Whatever the article's other merits, I don't think that's a good critique.
- ravi-delia 4y ago
  > So there was no point in trying to be virtuous, because the outcome was set before you were born. Yeah, but just because Omega already either put the money in the box or didn't doesn't mean you should act like it doesn't matter. God is omnicient, and sees whether you'll get into heaven, but curiously enough at the end of the line we see it's the people who did virtuous deeds which wound up there. As you can't see the stamp on your soul, you might as well act like your actions will decide it, since the outcome of your choices is what God looked at when He stamped you in the first place. It's a fairly pointless objection seeing as I doubt either of us are Calvinists, but their take on Predestination annoyed me when I learned about it, especially since they acted virtuously anyway (or pretend virtuously, whatever)!
- theonething 4y ago
  I see PG's quote as true, but hard to swallow. The truth is you do have to be the right kind of person to be successful (in this context, successful at startups). A person born with severe retardation or another mental incapacity is not the right kind of person to be successful at startups. The right kind of person has the genetic makeup, personality type, upbringing and/or access to resources to become successful. Not everyone has this and that's okay. And also, you (usually) don't know if you're the right kind of person until you try. So if you want to, try and keep trying until you don't want to anymore.
pwinnski 4y ago
The link was specifically labeled with a line from the essay: "Live in the future, then build what's missing." PG goes on to say that's how "many if not most of the biggest startups got started," which sounds more descriptive than proscriptive, since the proscription seems like nonsense.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mcguire 4y ago
The unfortunate truth of PG's claim is that: Odds are you are not the right sort of person. You're not at the leading edge. The field isn't so much changing as spinning in place. Sorry. But he carefully doesn't say that, and the majority of most of his essays are designed to inspire the belief that you are the right sort of person, etc.
deadcoder0904 4y ago
nope, not only this guys examples are bad but he just tries too hard to be a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. i called him that & he blocked me [1] for some reason. probably there's some truth in it that he got hurt. his examples are so bad. i've read paul graham's essays, naval's thread & alex hormozi's $100m offers book & all are quite good & easy to understand. naval's thread is a big hard but he has whole bunch of podcasts (4 hours) [2] explaining them in detail & articles [3] to accompany them. the op's entire schtick is to sell his courses by writing articles. first he wrote an article on build a business, not an audience [4] & then did a complete 180 turn & has been building an audience ever since. then he started selling courses. it's like his schtick is to go against the popular ideas & attack them to garner following. although, he does have some good insights in a few of his articles like when he summarized a book (nathan latka) or a video (sam parr)... rest of his posts are purely trying to hard to be a contrarian. tries to hard to be like peter thiel except he doesn't have any real arguments. you don't have to believe me. just read $100m offers & apply it. that book could've saved me many years of trying to figure out the framework myself & has every single technique mentioned on how to make a good offer. if you actually follow the advice to the t, you will actually be on the pathway to your 1st million. not to say, the author himself is worth >$100m & has a portfolio of companies making $150m/year so he'll be a billionaire in a year or two. you don't become a billionaire without any real insights unless you are a trust fund baby. [1]: https://twitter.com/deadcoder0904/status/1528327537872760833 https://twitter.com/deadcoder0904/status/1528327537872760833 [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-TZqOsVCNM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-TZqOsVCNM [3]: https://nav.al/rich https://nav.al/rich [4]: https://jakobgreenfeld.com/build_an_audience https://jakobgreenfeld.com/build_an_audience

feet 4y ago

To me that sounds like "you need insight into a field to have good hunches"

lumost 4y ago

Consider how ineffective this advice is then. What decisions can you make? You could take this to mean that you should follow your gut, or not. Does it share anything useful for formulating a decision? And why is this approach better than the alternatives?

startupdiscuss 4y ago
The point is, this was not meant to be advice! This was anti-advice. You can't use the criterion: if it is insightful it has to be actionable on an insight that says "I have no actions for you". The difference is, it is not trying to trick you.
- jasonwatkinspdx 4y ago
  It's just empty self aggrandizement. "Be the right sort of person and you'll have the right hunches" is transparent nonsense.
  - tomhoward 4y ago
    It's not nonsense, it's an obviously-tautological statement, made with the full awareness that it's not helpful advice, but used to explain the point. It's one sentence out of a long essay. Later in the essay he provides recipes for coming up with startup ideas, even though he warns that that approach is suboptimal. What more could be asked of him?
  - ProblemFactory 4y ago
    It's not empty, it's just way, way! too politely phrased. It's not advice on how to find ideas or how to become that person, but advice on who is ready to give founding a startup a try. During my career I did freelance mobile app and web development for about 10 years. In that time I came across many people who wanted to found a tech startup because "that's where the money is" and being a tech startup founder being a status symbol. Some enthusiastic youngsters, but mostly people who had a successful non-tech small business. And they were not the right sort of person and did not have the right hunches, they didn't use what they learned from their non-tech business, but instead sat down over a beer with friends to brainstorm "social-local-viral" app ideas. The advice instead should be that if you are struggling to come up with startup ideas, you probably aren't the right sort of person at this time. You should do something entirely different for a while until you find a product that just has to exist. Unfortunately, they had never read HN or PG, nor could I do more than politely refuse their business.
tomhoward 4y ago
The problem with the OP's criticism and yours is that it starts from the assumption that PG has set out to "sell" the reader faux-actionable insights. What he's really doing is answering the question "how can I come up with startup ideas?", which has always been asked of him and the other YC partners frequently. And his answer is: you shouldn't try to come up with startup ideas; that's not how it works. Instead you should just notice if/when they appear before you. He's clearly not claiming to be doing what the author is accusing him of trying to do. He's just explaining something he'd noticed after (at that time) 7 years of funding/advising some of the most successful startups. (That said, later in the essay he goes on to offer actionable recipes for formulating startup ideas anyway). In answer to your question: you can take his advice, or not, to stop trying to confect startup ideas, and instead just pay attention to the opportunities you notice from your own experience.
- planarhobbit 4y ago
  This is why I don’t get the recent pg hate that’s been happening on HN. He’s always done this, but now people are saying he’s out of touch because he’s rich/white/old. Majority of things he’s blogged are no-nonsense observations.
  - trwhite 4y ago
    I think one has to take his writing of late with a pinch of salt because he writes things that only a rich, white and old guy could write. But the earlier stuff is still great. Hackers & Painters is still a wonderful book.

redler 4y ago

It’s the “some of us just have midichlorians” insight.

flatline 4y ago

> If you're at the leading edge of a field that's changing fast, when you have a hunch that something is worth doing, you're more likely to be right. Right there he suggests you become an expert. An expert who is at the crest of the wave in some field is more likely to see over it and get a glimpse of what’s next. I think he is spot on. It’s no guarantee but it’s probably as close as you can get.

015a 4y ago

I think it does belong; ultimately, knowing if one has the "right sort of hunches" is only possible in hindsight, there's as much luck as anything else involved in what PG/VCs/founders do, and they in-no-uncertain-terms admit this through their their entire model of investment; throwing money at 100 companies praying that one 1000x's. Just as how its easy to criticize ideas because criticism is cheap, its also easy to pick out if a business will probably fail; but singling out success is near-impossible. If you asked me if playing video games all day was a good way to get the brain-surgeon-rocket-engineering job of your dreams, I'd say it probably isn't; but the right way is far more elusive. In other words, its high level, not useful, and once you get into the specifics his message falls apart. I also think: VCs are generally quick to trivialize the impact the rising economic tide of the '10s had on all investments, not the least of all in the novelty of software-related venture investments, and many people will be found without pants over the next decade. Which I only say to add that this is a common theme with insight porn; trivializing luck & privilege.

vharuck 4y ago

>"if you're the right sort of person, you have the right sort of hunches" To me, this sounds like a line from a multi-level marketing pitch. It sounds like they're saying "This may not apply to you," but a lot of people will hear "There are chosen people (and you're probably one of them)." It reminds me of the Calvinism sect of Christianity. They believed in predestination for salvation: God has always known who be a good person and deserve salvation. So there was no point in trying to be virtuous, because the outcome was set before you were born. Still, Calvinists often adopted public shows of virtue, like meticulous gardens, to convince others they were part of the "to be saved" group.

andrewflnr 4y ago
Yeah, but there's always someone who will misinterpret you. You can try to mitigate it, but at some point you have to stop worrying about it and just be honest. Whatever the article's other merits, I don't think that's a good critique.
ravi-delia 4y ago
> So there was no point in trying to be virtuous, because the outcome was set before you were born. Yeah, but just because Omega already either put the money in the box or didn't doesn't mean you should act like it doesn't matter. God is omnicient, and sees whether you'll get into heaven, but curiously enough at the end of the line we see it's the people who did virtuous deeds which wound up there. As you can't see the stamp on your soul, you might as well act like your actions will decide it, since the outcome of your choices is what God looked at when He stamped you in the first place. It's a fairly pointless objection seeing as I doubt either of us are Calvinists, but their take on Predestination annoyed me when I learned about it, especially since they acted virtuously anyway (or pretend virtuously, whatever)!
theonething 4y ago
I see PG's quote as true, but hard to swallow. The truth is you do have to be the right kind of person to be successful (in this context, successful at startups). A person born with severe retardation or another mental incapacity is not the right kind of person to be successful at startups. The right kind of person has the genetic makeup, personality type, upbringing and/or access to resources to become successful. Not everyone has this and that's okay. And also, you (usually) don't know if you're the right kind of person until you try. So if you want to, try and keep trying until you don't want to anymore.

pwinnski 4y ago

The link was specifically labeled with a line from the essay: "Live in the future, then build what's missing." PG goes on to say that's how "many if not most of the biggest startups got started," which sounds more descriptive than proscriptive, since the proscription seems like nonsense.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mcguire 4y ago

The unfortunate truth of PG's claim is that: Odds are you are not the right sort of person. You're not at the leading edge. The field isn't so much changing as spinning in place. Sorry. But he carefully doesn't say that, and the majority of most of his essays are designed to inspire the belief that you are the right sort of person, etc.

deadcoder0904 4y ago

nope, not only this guys examples are bad but he just tries too hard to be a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. i called him that & he blocked me [1] for some reason. probably there's some truth in it that he got hurt. his examples are so bad. i've read paul graham's essays, naval's thread & alex hormozi's $100m offers book & all are quite good & easy to understand. naval's thread is a big hard but he has whole bunch of podcasts (4 hours) [2] explaining them in detail & articles [3] to accompany them. the op's entire schtick is to sell his courses by writing articles. first he wrote an article on build a business, not an audience [4] & then did a complete 180 turn & has been building an audience ever since. then he started selling courses. it's like his schtick is to go against the popular ideas & attack them to garner following. although, he does have some good insights in a few of his articles like when he summarized a book (nathan latka) or a video (sam parr)... rest of his posts are purely trying to hard to be a contrarian. tries to hard to be like peter thiel except he doesn't have any real arguments. you don't have to believe me. just read $100m offers & apply it. that book could've saved me many years of trying to figure out the framework myself & has every single technique mentioned on how to make a good offer. if you actually follow the advice to the t, you will actually be on the pathway to your 1st million. not to say, the author himself is worth >$100m & has a portfolio of companies making $150m/year so he'll be a billionaire in a year or two. you don't become a billionaire without any real insights unless you are a trust fund baby. [1]: https://twitter.com/deadcoder0904/status/1528327537872760833 https://twitter.com/deadcoder0904/status/1528327537872760833 [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-TZqOsVCNM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-TZqOsVCNM [3]: https://nav.al/rich https://nav.al/rich [4]: https://jakobgreenfeld.com/build_an_audience https://jakobgreenfeld.com/build_an_audience