3 ms·
I'm normally very against the HN norm of just naming a fallacy and considering an entire argument dismissed but in this case I think it does apply. This is not
by giraffe_lady 4y ago
I'm normally very against the HN norm of just naming a fallacy and considering an entire argument dismissed but in this case I think it does apply. This is not a Just World, some unworkable companies will get bridge funding because of their connections and no other reason.
Aside from that timing is always a thing. There's certainly a company out there that is 8 months away from proving the soundness of their idea that now only has six months of funding, or whatever.
The idea that in every case, "the market" or whatever will arrive at the most perfectly correct conclusion is silly at any time, but particularly in one of uncertainty and upheaval.
- wpietri 4y agoYeah, I'm not arguing that "whatever will arrive at the most perfectly correct conclusion". (And I don't think that sql-spy was arguing that either.) What I'm saying is that I don't think this particular circumstance is going to be any less just than usual. Indeed, I think there's good reason to expect it to be more just given that what we're talking about is mostly a short-term cash crunch that's easily explained. E.g., one company is raising $1 bn for bridge loans: https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/11/brex-ceo-is-trying-to-raise-over-1-billion-in-a-weekend-for-svb-related-bridge-loans/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/11/brex-ceo-is-trying-to-rais... That kind of support is not something marginal startups have access to in normal times.
- sql-spy 4y agoCircumstances changed. Running a startup means time is never on your side. If you are still 8 months away from proving "soundness" of your idea then you are already too late.
- giraffe_lady 4y agook but I mean that means that whatever outcome arrived at is necessarily the correct outcome. you're establishing correctness post hoc and so you will always find it. have fun tho.