9 ms·

Sorry if this sounds harsh, and I know he has a lot of fans out there. But this guy struck gold 5 years ago with Digg. Sure, he deserves props for this. Howe

• deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
• mmahemoff 15y ago
  FWIW Diggnation could be considered a second, successful, project. I consider it fairly independent of Digg, as either of them could really have operated independently.
  • Timothee 15y ago
    I would extend that to Revision3. I'm not sure how successful they are financially but just based on the fact that they're still around with many many shows going, I'd guess they're doing just fine.
• untog 15y ago
  I don't want to be some sort of Kevin Rose defender in this thread, but I don't think it's fair to say that he just "had an idea". He had an idea and spent years working on it, iterating and improving until Digg finally hit the big time. I think he deserves credit for that. As a developer, I agree that some "ideas guys" suck. But some of them are fantastic, and have a huge talent in taking a core concept and fleshing out requirements, objectives and so on. Often we developers are actually really bad at that, and we end up getting distracted by endless refactoring, or bringing down response times, etc. etc. There is nothing wrong with a mix of the two.
  • samstave 15y ago
    >He had an idea and spent years working on it, iterating and improving until Digg finally hit the big time. I think he deserves credit for that. I don't think anyone has argued against this. He does deserve credit for this. The problem is that he has been given too much credit. I.E. that there were far more ideas of the same caliber. I am sure this must have been tough on him, to fail at producing again like the early digg iteration. I see the evolution of the social content site to be: Slashdot --> Digg --> Reddit. Each a stepping stone for the next. And I do not think this is about THE CONTENT -- I think this is about the UX you provide the users, and the control over that UX you leave to the users. Digg evolved /.'s model. Reddit evolved Digg's. Reddit has provided a UX which allows for a VERY fluid and quick experience with the content, given FULL control to the users on what content they see, how it is categorized, modded etc. Kevin took money from ivestors for his own little think tank - that money was largely given to him by charismatic reputation alone. Now, after a very short period, he isn't even pivoting, or "shooting this idea in the head to work on others" -- he is abandoning the whole freaking endeavor and taking (unknown) position in struggling social company, Google. This doesn't leave a good taste in anyone's mouth (Sour Milk? (Sorry)) because being given $1.7MM which he gets to walk away from is a slap in the face to the people who work their asses off on good ideas and don't get any of the valley coddling as Kevin.
    • PhrosTT 15y ago
      My main problem with Digg is it blew up largely because Rose got to shamelessly plug it on ScreenSavers. A LOT of ideas can succeed when you get to skip the whole network effect hurdle. I think he has some insightful thoughts once in a while (like predictions he makes on Diggnation), and he did a great job parlaying Digg into Rev3. I'm also pretty jealous he'll get a paycheck to say "Hey this feature would be cool" or use his celebrity to push Google+.
      • temphn 15y ago
        But he got to plug it on ScreenSavers because he worked his way up from being the IT guy on the show to cameo appearances onscreen to actually having his own show. Major props on the hustle there.
• goronbjorn 15y ago
  Google doesn't have any engineering problems, that's for sure. They want Google+ to succeed (assuming that's what he'd be involved with), but I think it's fair to say the problems they're struggling with there are at the "idea/design" level as opposed to the actual codebase. Say what you want about Kevin Rose in terms of things he's created, but he does have a very good eye for great ideas, see early investments in Fab, Path, Zynga, Square, Foursquare, Twitter for evidence of that.
  • mbreese 15y ago
    The other thing he's done well is engage his audience. If he can help Google+ become more engaging, more 'sticky', then he'll have done great. That's assuming he'll be working on that product.
    • runevault 15y ago
      Except the Digg redo (which he was a part of) drove users away, so if he ever actually HAD that touch, it is as likely he lost it as anything.
      • randomdata 15y ago
        However, the Digg redesign was prematurely deployed because the old code could simply no longer handle the load. At least that was the story. Who knows what it could have been if it were released on the intended schedule.
  • freshfunk 15y ago
    This is true but Google has always been an engineering-led organization as opposed to a product-led one. Social networking is less of an engineering problem than it is a product problem. This is true for other social products as well. Fundamentally, Google is taking the wrong approach. Listen to how Vic Gundotra talks about Google+ as opposed to how Zuckerberg talks about Facebook. This may be a step in the right direction but it will mean more than just hiring idea people. Those people need to have real power in the org if they are going to make a difference. It's more likely that Kevin Rose will end up like Dennis Crowley. He'll try his hand at Google, will realize that he can't make much of a difference given his position and leave in a few years to scratch that itch at another startup.
• alain94040 15y ago
  What could he possibly be bringing to the table with Google? Actually, product people with experience about trendy consumerish topics is what Google needs. Too many engineers, not enough touchy-feely people there. That being said, based on his recent changes in directions, it doesn't sound like a long-term fit just yet. Time will tell.
  • samstave 15y ago
    I think there will be a limit to the amount of beer, fixies and tea topical info that G+ will be able to take.
• shareme 15y ago
  Obviously you forgot Kevin Rose's background..are you aware that in fact he is a developer? Look up his CS degree dude.. At least know about the effing subject before you open your effing mouth
  • JeremyBanks 15y ago
    I guess your post is sarcasm, intended to make me look this up? He then attended the University of Nevada Las Vegas, majoring in computer science but dropped out in 1998.
  • xpose2000 15y ago
    A web developer does not outsource his pet project to someone else to code. He did not do any development on his projects. I've heard him talk about coding and he openly admits that he's been out of it for so long that he is no longer qualified on the subject. About Digg's original code: http://blog.mixergy.com/pr-lies-destroy-your-understanding-of-how-business-really-works-owen-byrne-digg/ http://blog.mixergy.com/pr-lies-destroy-your-understanding-o...
  • frou_dh 15y ago
    Developing makes you a developer. I did a lot of math during my degree, but I never use it, and would in no way consider myself a mathematician because I've lost most of it. Anyway, I quite like Kevin Rose from what I've seen. You need all types in the industry, not just technical people.
• spindritf 15y ago
  > Once they have that reputation as being awesome it will stick around no matter how badly they perform after their initial success. Proof of ability trumps everything else.
  • deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
• Timothee 15y ago
  There's a distinction to be made between "idea guys" and "product people". You're criticizing "idea guys", while it seems that Kevin Rose might be more of a product person. The "idea guy" is the guy who comes to a developer and start with "I've got this great idea for an app…", thinks it's genius but never dives down to all the details of said-app. A product person might or might not know how to code but s/he will(/should) be able to articulate exactly what the product should do or not, how things should work together, etc. It's common for developers to think they don't need anybody to make a good product but a great product person will make a difference. It doesn't matter if they understand how to code or not. Indeed. That's not their role. Understanding how to code does not a good product make. There are tons of examples of that. However, you have a point about the industry giving a pass to people with previous successful project(s). But probably with good reason: overall there aren't that many very successful projects, so if you had one, it's still much better than a lot of people.
  • xpose2000 15y ago
    Great insights here breaking down "idea guys" and "product people". Never thought of it like that.
  • coryl 15y ago
    For the record, and this is just a matter of semantics and word play, but some people use the titles "idea guy" and "product guy" interchangeably. Some very good product visionary types even label themselves "idea guy".
  • vibrunazo 15y ago
    I agree that knowing how to code is not utmost necessary. But don't you think it's highly important and, at least,very close to necessary? An idea/product guy will never come up with a solution he didn't know was technically viable. So his pool of solutions is more limited than that of a hacker. He'll also waste time overthinking ideas that are not technically viable. So he's not as efficient. You don't need both legs to run a marathon. But it's so important to have them both. That it's no coincidence that every great runner has them both.
• jayliew 15y ago
  To quote pg: "A hacker who has learned what to make, and not just how to make, is extraordinarily powerful." As a developer, it is frustrating to see fellow developers place too much importance on being able to code as a necessary ingredient for startup success. As a hacker, I'd say that most hackers know how to make, but don't know what to make. That is to say, most startups from these type of hackers with the "if I build they will come"[1] mentality end up basically degenerating into non-profits or open-source (when their intent was to become the next big for-profit company). To my fellow hardcore hackers. Please get over yourself and learn some non-technical skills: sales, marketing, design, product UI/UX, biz dev, getting distribution, negotiation skills, heck - some people skills! (this comment not withstanding since I'm frustrated with the comment above). If you're going to look down on people who can't code, you should get out of your own comfort zone and do all those non-technical things I've just listed above first. Kevin Rose has a rolodex, which I'm sure has benefits to whatever his entrepreneurial venture is. You don't? Why not? Learn how to hustle. Just because you can't code, doesn't mean you can't build a business - and vice versa - just because you can code, doesn't mean you can build a business. / end rant [1] exception, not the rule
  • _sentient 15y ago
    I completely agree. Even better, learn to both hack and hustle. That is truly where the magic happens.
  • zerostar07 15y ago
    Sometimes there may be obstacles to what you propose. Being good at networking etc. is basically a performance skill that doesn't just depend on mindset, but also on good looks, race/culture, age, sex, general likability or other external factors. This is not mentioned often, and I might be wrong but I think it is a factor, despite the fact that the startup world presents itself as the ultimate meritocracy.
    • jayliew 15y ago
      People's natural tendency to associate good looks with intelligence, etc. has been documented (IIRC), but I completely disagree that it cannot be overcome if YOU decide you will "fix" it. Example: Sean Stephenson http://timetostand.com/ http://timetostand.com/ (see short video) Not attacking you personally - but anybody, .. anybody at all who gives me that response are basically chickening out. Consider this the opposite problem of "business guy don't want to even learn how to code, give all sorts of reasons". Technical guy don't want to learn how to hustle, give all sorts of reasons. Again, Sean Stephenson.
• m0th87 15y ago
  Alexis Ohanian isn't a developer, but he's one of the names behind reddit and hipmunk. I don't think anyone would argue he hasn't had a big role in either company's success. Clearly you can be a non-developer founder without being that "ideas guy".
  • xpose2000 15y ago
    Great point. I love the fact that Alexis also documented all of his start-up ideas on his blog. Interestingly only a few came to be successful. However, if I had to bet on which one had staying power, it'd be Alexis. I have a lot of respect and admiration for him.
• duxup 15y ago
  I agree. I hope this isn't the start of those weird campaigns where an organisation start picking up recognizable names rather than deal with fundamental failures. Google of course is no failure but it seems like I roll my eyes at Google decisions more than ever before. Like you I have no clue what this guy brings to a company as big as Google and their products.
• andrewhillman 15y ago
  It's really tough to hit two home runs in the entrepreneurial game, but one home run is really all you need to get investors to think you will come up with another success. Kevin may be an "idea guy" but he is also a "product guy" and I think this will be his role within Google. Google's main mobile app is terrible so maybe they think he can help with this product. I personally wish Google would go back to their roots and build a simple mobile app that just has a search box.
• ChuckMcM 15y ago
  Heh. Developer angst. Very common. Specific comments on your rant: 1) "Ideas" types do well at Google, they reward people for starting new things, not so much finishing things. 2) "it seems like people in the industry get by based on one previous successful project." - works both ways, people also get tarred with one unsuccessful project. And like success depending on how hard the fail was it can be an influence on the rest of your career. 3) "What could he possibly be bringing to the table with Google?" - this guy has 'model googler' written all over him. Seriously. Lots of ideas, lots of ways to use existing technology tied together in fun ways. If the guy can convince two or three developers at Google to help him bring an idea to fruition he'll do well.
  • mikeryan 15y ago
    People also get tarred with one unsuccessful project. This doesn't actually seem to be the case. The startup space is littered with ex-CEO's who can still raise capital. These folks are seen as battle hardened. I think all of the Color guys are going to end up fine despite that debacle.
    • ChuckMcM 15y ago
      Good point, but there are flavors of fail. There is the 'you reached to high and fell off the ladder' flavors which are generally seen as a good thing, and then there is the 'selling bungee harnesses to teenagers' flavor where people say "What exactly were you thinking would happen?" I tried to help Ed Patterman build a Golf magazine on the web in '95 it failed because it was too early. Sony tried to create an e-reader where they charged money to put out of copyright works in PDF on to it for you to read. It failed because it was a stupid idea.
    • Tobu 15y ago
      > People also get tarred with one unsuccessful project. Kevin Rose himself would be a counterexample. If he was responsible for Digg's rise, he is also responsible for it losing its audience and relevance.
• veguss 15y ago
  This is branding 101. Don't fight it, learn to play the game.
• bksenior 15y ago
  Shipping ideas is hard and is a multi phased process in which technical building is only a small portion. Finding an audience, not f'ing up your product once adopted, growing your team and letting the experts do their job without hopping in to meddle is just as difficult to do. I am not the biggest fan of how Oink was handled, but this guy clearly creates and understands leverage and in 9/10 cases that is more valuable than the perfect technical product.
• fudged 15y ago
  This was my exact thought process. Burka has great UI skill. I really don't know what value Rose could bring to Google.
• Tycho 15y ago
  He made something called Pounce too that did quite well.
• PagingCraig 15y ago
  You sound jealous.
• anigbrowl 15y ago
  What could he possibly be bringing to the table with Google? Knowledge of how things fail, as much as how they are started. He's not just an ideas person, he's also a signing-the-checks person and a making-the-deals person and a catching-the-flak person. In short, a business guy. I have never liked or used Digg so I'm not carrying any water for him. But I've had that 'I do all the work and he gets all the credit' feeling, only to realize that the difference was that I had taken a job rather than starting a business. Code is just a means to an end. Sure, architecture and good code are important, but they're important so that users don't have to care what's making it work. When I walk into a store, my life is in the hands of the architects and laborers who built the structure; and having worked in construction, I can tell you that they did a hell of a lot of hard work. However, that's incidental to my purpose in entering the store, and I don't hold it against the store owner that he didn't personally build any of the structure his business operates in.
  • xpose2000 15y ago
    Very well said.
• runako 15y ago
  Not constructive at all. As far as I can tell, Kevin Rose struck gold at building a company through his efforts. As a hacker, you may value hiring developers, promotion, etc. at zero, but Digg's users do not. I'm willing to bet many HN readers could learn something useful from Kevin Rose, no matter what his formal or informal training.
• ktsmith 15y ago
  To be fair in October of 2004 Rose interviewed Rob 'cmdrtaco' Malda and one of the questions included what Rob would have done differently with slashdot if he were to do it today. Digg appeared in December following that interview. You could argue that Rose paid someone to implement Rob's idea.
• freshfey 15y ago
  But isn't this like hating on the architect because he didn't actually build the beautiful building by hand? You still like the building and give the architect credit for it, not the builder(s).
• musclman 15y ago
  You would understand what he brings to the table if you had any idea how difficult it is to create "one previous successful project" on the scale of Digg. Kevin has demonstrated an ability to create something with a huge following from nothing, which is a skill set that your average Google developer does not have.
• samwise 15y ago
  let's give credit where credit is due. Kevin is an successful angel investor and an influencer in the techs space. Not to mention that every company that he has worked with have nothing but good things to say about him. Google currently employees more than 20,000 people. I'm sure at this point they have plenty of engineers. A couple guys with some sense of design will not hurt the bottom line but have huge potential to add some much needed polish to Google's social initiatives. /2 cents
• yangtheman 15y ago
  I agree on people seen as successful based on one prior successful project. I have seen it playing out a few times before. It didn't matter what the circumstances were (e.g. mostly luck) or how the story was spinned, once you can place a successful exit under your name, VC's seem to fall head over heels for you.
• gwern 15y ago
  Why do these people become stars? Economics suggests it's because they're already proven to some degree; eg. http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/04/why-not-superstar-slavery.html http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/04/why-not-superstar-slav... summarizes a Tervio article predicting superstardom when the following conditions are met: Desired abilities are rare and lasting. It is very expensive to try someone new. Everyone can see which trials worked or not. Winners are free to demand more money or walk. #1 is arguable whether it's true, but people seem to think it's true - any endeavour by someone like Rose comes with built-in interest & buzz. Why? Personal affection? No, because people think it's better than a random newly launched project. #2 is fairly true - how do you test someone on whether they can build a successful Facebook clone or innovate on it with less than thousands of dollars of their time and other resources (at a minimum)? #3 is pretty true, especially for web communities. #4 is very true; as Hacker News people love pointing out, it's a free country.
• clark-kent 15y ago
  I don't get the KR bashing. Kevin is both a product and content guy. From TechTV (where he went from a tech support guy to a TV show host) to revision3, Diggnation, Foundation, Random. This guy is always creating content, very much like a hacker. He built the first prototype for Digg. This is the type of guy HN/Startup school aspires to produce.
• temphn 15y ago
  Kevin Rose worked his way up from being a behind the scenes IT guy to doing cameos to running the Screen Savers to founding Digg[1]. Is he a coder? No, but he's at least technical enough to find and recruit pretty good engineering talent. Moreover, he's also had strong angel investments and shown an ability to do it again with Oink (a solid product with good reviews on the App Store). As a developer, I hate these kinds of people because more often than not their ideas suck. But Digg obviously did not suck as an idea. It did not achieve world domination, but it was pretty damn popular as a site for a while and the category (as exemplified by Reddit and even the Like Button) is still strong. There are people out there to hate on, but Kevin Rose is not one of them. He would be a great product manager at Google. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Rose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Rose
  • jayliew 15y ago
    I'd go one step further: don't hate. It's a negative feeling emotion that will do yourself more harm in the long run :) Be happy for people's success. Would you want people to hate you when you succeed?
• codepost 15y ago
  Lets see what could he bring to google?? He studied computer science and university and has spent basically his whole life working in the tech industry. Oink had 150,000 downloads in a month. He's probably one of the most influential people in the tech industry and he obviously knows social (which google struggles with). Plus he had an awesome team thats going with him to google. Some of the best designers and DEVELOPERS that he (again one of the most influential people in the tech industry) could get to work for him. Thats just off the top of my head.
• a15i 15y ago
  agreed. another good example s sean parker. sean who? oh the guy that created napster 2 decades ago.
• eli_gottlieb 15y ago
  Welcome to capitalism.
• codeonfire 15y ago
  "What could he possibly be bringing to the table with Google?" He makes insecure high level corporate types look successful. The guy who didn't hire a famous guy this year is going to get fired. Fame is a useful product to some people.
• spobo 15y ago
  He has the skill to assemble and lead/manage a group of quality engineers & designers. He connects people. People who want to program it, who want to invest in it and users who want to use it. His ideas might not be that great (or better put, fitting) these days but that doesn't make him less useful. He's also a thought leader and someone people look up to. He's a great asset to any company really. I wish him all the best at Google.
• rayhano 15y ago
  Isn't Google full of developers, run by developers? Maybe they need an ideas guy... they do seem to be coming up short for say... the last five years?