4 ms·
Disregarding the weird tone, the letter makes some interesting points. None of us is the best person out there. This whole notion of someone out there being
by Udo 15y ago
Disregarding the weird tone, the letter makes some interesting points.
None of us is the best person out there.
This whole notion of someone out there being the best programmer (or person, or whatever) is fallacious. While there are certainly many degrees between "awesome" and "failing", it's important to recognize that either you're indeed awesome at what you're doing right now or it's time to move onto something else. Of course, the definition of "awesome" is completely subjective so you have a lot of room for introspection there.
That’s irrelevant! Because we are best for each other.
This is an important sentiment, certainly one of the most crucial ones in a co-founder relationship.
I have seen what it looks like when it's not working out: we were friends before the startup, we liked to talk about crazy ideas all day. But a while into the startup, all we talked about was money and disappointment. This created an atmosphere of misery and failure, long before the actual failure of the company. If I were to do a startup again today, I would look for this kind of synergy the author is describing. It's important. It's not enough to just be a bunch of dudes hacking away at stuff.
- d3x 15y ago"It's important. It's not enough to just be a bunch of dudes hacking away at stuff." I Disagree. This is the most productive environment for me. The issue is that people set out to start a company and not solve a problem. A bunch of dudes siting around hacking to start a company might not be the best idea but a bunch of dudes sitting around trying to solve a problem is the best way to start.
- Udo 15y agoI don't see the point of having cofounders in that case. If it's really just a bunch of guys hacking away at stuff, you might as well just hire them. I admit I'm on the fence about the whole "you have to have a cofounder" thing to begin with - my own experience with having a cofounder hasn't been that great (it's not his fault, or mine, it was just a bad dynamic in general). > a bunch of dudes sitting around trying to solve a problem is the best way to start I totally agree. Without a great and creative team you're screwed. This article isn't about those aspects, though, isn't it? It's about what else a cofounder should bring to the table that moves the company forward.