10 ms·

My question is, what do you count as "doing"? Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. Th

My question is, what do you count as "doing"? Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. They go on to make some amazing building that gets all sorts of awards and recognition. Is anyone really so naive as to suggest that I am deserving of any credit whatsoever? In the words of Urkel, "Did I do that?" There are some leaders in the tech world who have clearly done something. John Carmack did something. Steve Wozniak did something. There are some questionable cases as well. As far as Altman goes, I put him firmly in the same camp as Musk. They haven't done jack shit. I give them no respect, recognition, or credit. They were just wealthy people spending money. I seriously question the people who look at them positively in any way whatsoever.

godzillabrennus 3y ago
Someone has to be skilled enough in fundraising to be able to raise the money to get the talent to do the thing. That alone is a difficult skill to master. It’s often harder to do than to be able to create great things. Carmack and Woz are legends for a reason.
- Apreche 3y ago
  None of these people were skilled at fundraising. Their opportunities were inherited.
  - throwaway2037 3y ago
    > Their opportunities were inherited. I agree with your first sentence, but I am confused by your second sentence. Are you referring to this part? "Carmack and Woz are legends for a reason."
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
gkoberger 3y ago
I don’t think you need to like the people you listed (I, for example, hate Musk). But you seem to have no curiosity around understanding the value non-technical people can bring to a project or company or innovation. You need both to do something great. And there’s thousands of Woz’s out there whose names we don’t know because they never met their Jobs.
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  But even all Wozzes out there who met their Jobs are still relegated to just Wozzes, all credit being vaccumed up by their respective Jobs. Not saying that their Jobs don’t deserve any the credit, i’m just pointing out the unfair pattern of how all the credit is being vaccumed up. One clearly needs the other but it doesn’t look like a two way street at all.
  - adventured 3y ago
    It's not unfair in the case of Jobs & Woz. Wozniak represented a few years of Apple's earliest history. His contribution was similar to Paul Allen's contribution to Microsoft. Extraordinarily important in the first few years, and that was the end of that. The reality is, people broadly like Woz, and particularly among the HN crowd Steve Jobs is disliked; that's the explanation, it's purely emotional; so they want to give Woz more credit than he deserves. There's an obsession with trying to discredit people like Jobs (and their contributions), particularly among the hacker news crowd. Fundamentally it's because most hackers don't understand leadership, marketing, sales, etc. In this thread you'll see people claim Elon Musk is non-technical. That's bordering on belligerent. A person would have to have avoided the dozens of YouTube interviews where he demonstrates his technical understanding to an elaborate degree. Musk is as technical as Bill Gates was in his post coding days at Microsoft (which spanned the bulk of his time at Microsoft) and I've never seen anyone on HN claim Gates as being non-technical. How it works is simple: I dislike this person, therefore I shall tear them down; I'm unable to be objective about the subject, so I shall be emotional and irrational instead.
    - darkwraithcov 3y ago
wslh 3y ago
> Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. They go on to make some amazing building that gets all sorts of awards and recognition. Is anyone really so naive as to suggest that I am deserving of any credit whatsoever? In the words of Urkel, "Did I do that?" This example doesn't work, at least, since the industrial revolution. If an average person wins the lottery they would need to solve a lot (really a lot) of issues to move a business forward and most probably go bankrupt except if he/she puts the money in low risk financial instruments. There is no "I do that" in the complex world of business. It is a nice Disney story with a few examples. Organization does the work and that includes anonymous engineers, not only CEOs and founders. The great ignition could start at a garage (e.g. Apple) but the road is long.
foobaw 3y ago
You're implying that you knew how to hire and identify smart architects and provided them the right vision to build a good building. There wouldn't be a counterfactual in your hypothetical scenario, but I'm confident that the difference between someone that got lucky and hired "smart" architects versus a visionary doing the same task would be drastic. Money can only get you so far.
- bmitc 3y ago
  Is there an indication that Altman has a special talent for this over others?
  - adventured 3y ago
    Yes, the accomplishments of OpenAI represent that in action. It's an exceptional outcome to say the least. If everybody could do it, they would be doing it. Altman's abilities are every bit as rare as that of a 10x software developer. The same was true of Jobs, and the same is true of Musk (regardless of whether someone likes him or not; who cares if he's likable, it's an infantile emotional derangement to obsess so much over likability).
    - bmitc 3y ago
      > Yes, the accomplishments of OpenAI represent that in action. It's an exceptional outcome to say the least. What specifically backs that up? Didn't others create the technology? Is it that hard to hire and organize when you've got a top researcher that everyone wants to work with? By many accounts, he was just using OpenAI to further other businesses and investments.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - throwaway2037 3y ago
        > Is it that hard to hire and organize when you've got a top researcher that everyone wants to work with? Hire a top researcher? Ok, you could get lucky with a few. But keep? Good luck if you are an incompetent manager. If Sam Altman was the "know-nothing" that so many on HN claim him to be, then the top researchers would leave and go to Meta, Google Brain, etc. It makes no sense that this core research team has been so stable. Is this not evidence enough for you?
kortilla 3y ago
> As far as Altman goes, I put him firmly in the same camp as Musk. They haven't done jack shit. What Musk did with SpaceX is in no way comparable to just paying an architect to build a building. Unless the entire biography from Isaacson was fabricated, he was extremely hands on in design decisions, company direction, and hiring. If you think none of those were relevant to the success of spacex, you’re completely delusional.
- gamblor956 3y ago
  Per dozens of engineers at SpaceX...the biography from Isaacson contains numerous exaggerations and outright fabrications. Elon Musk's involvement in design decisions was limited to the typical executive level involvement in hardware design, in the sense that he was presented multiple options by the engineers and designers and got to pick which one they went with. Indeed, with SpaceX it's usually immediately obvious when Musk was involved: does something fail spectacularly in a way it wasn't supposed to? That was Musk, getting involved in something he didn't understand and overriding the engineers and other professionals. (Contrast the first Starship launch this year, which Musk micromanaged, vs the second launch in November in which he had minimal involvement due to being distracted by X and Tesla.)
  - throwaway2037 3y ago
    > Contrast the first Starship launch this year, which Musk micromanaged, vs the second launch in November in which he had minimal involvement due to being distracted by X and Tesla. I tried to a Google search for a source. I cannot find anything. Do you have a good source, or insider information?
  - kortilla 3y ago
    This is just made up shit though. None of what you are stating is backed by any sources. >Per dozens of engineers at SpaceX...the biography from Isaacson contains numerous exaggerations and outright fabrications. Which ones, specifically? >the sense that he was presented multiple options by the engineers and designers and got to pick which one they went with. Even if this were the only level of involvement, do you realize how important these are? Do you know how it would have worked out for the company if they focused on payload instead of reusability?
Johnny555 3y ago
>Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. They go on to make some amazing building that gets all sorts of awards and recognition. Is anyone really so naive as to suggest that I am deserving of any credit whatsoever? You should try hiring a group of really smart people and getting them to work together to create something great before you dismiss the skills of the person doing that.
- VirusNewbie 3y ago
  My question would be, is that what Sam does? I wasn't aware that he was involved in building the founding team. I think that's certainly a skill, but I haven't yet heard that's his secret sauce.
  - Johnny555 3y ago
    I don't honestly know what he does, but given that he's got both investors and employees loyal to him makes me think that he does a lot more than say "Here's a pile of money, I'm going to lock you smart people in a room and take credit for whatever you come up with"
    - paulryanrogers 3y ago
      Employees faced losing their equity if the market got spooked, so not sure the petition is objective evidence of loyalty. Apparently some employees near him wanted him out.
      - Johnny555 3y ago
        The petition sure didn't sound like employees trying to get away from Altman: "We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAI and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary run by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman."
matrix_overload 3y ago
>Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. Each one will end up pulling in their own direction, fighting with others over minor things, and nothing will ever get done. Managing smart people, resolving conflicts, and making sure stuff gets done is a rare and underappreciated skill.
tim333 3y ago
The guy's who fund these things deserve some credit for that at least. Take the Medici's for example, bankers who: >claimed to have funded the invention of the piano and opera, financed the construction of Saint Peter's Basilica and Santa Maria del Fiore, and were patrons of Brunelleschi, Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael, Machiavelli, Galileo, and Francesco Redi, among many others in the arts and sciences. Sure they didn't do the paintings but a lot of that stuff probably wouldn't have happened without them.

godzillabrennus 3y ago

Someone has to be skilled enough in fundraising to be able to raise the money to get the talent to do the thing. That alone is a difficult skill to master. It’s often harder to do than to be able to create great things. Carmack and Woz are legends for a reason.

Apreche 3y ago
None of these people were skilled at fundraising. Their opportunities were inherited.
- throwaway2037 3y ago
  > Their opportunities were inherited. I agree with your first sentence, but I am confused by your second sentence. Are you referring to this part? "Carmack and Woz are legends for a reason."
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

gkoberger 3y ago

I don’t think you need to like the people you listed (I, for example, hate Musk). But you seem to have no curiosity around understanding the value non-technical people can bring to a project or company or innovation. You need both to do something great. And there’s thousands of Woz’s out there whose names we don’t know because they never met their Jobs.

lacrimacida 3y ago
But even all Wozzes out there who met their Jobs are still relegated to just Wozzes, all credit being vaccumed up by their respective Jobs. Not saying that their Jobs don’t deserve any the credit, i’m just pointing out the unfair pattern of how all the credit is being vaccumed up. One clearly needs the other but it doesn’t look like a two way street at all.
- adventured 3y ago
  It's not unfair in the case of Jobs & Woz. Wozniak represented a few years of Apple's earliest history. His contribution was similar to Paul Allen's contribution to Microsoft. Extraordinarily important in the first few years, and that was the end of that. The reality is, people broadly like Woz, and particularly among the HN crowd Steve Jobs is disliked; that's the explanation, it's purely emotional; so they want to give Woz more credit than he deserves. There's an obsession with trying to discredit people like Jobs (and their contributions), particularly among the hacker news crowd. Fundamentally it's because most hackers don't understand leadership, marketing, sales, etc. In this thread you'll see people claim Elon Musk is non-technical. That's bordering on belligerent. A person would have to have avoided the dozens of YouTube interviews where he demonstrates his technical understanding to an elaborate degree. Musk is as technical as Bill Gates was in his post coding days at Microsoft (which spanned the bulk of his time at Microsoft) and I've never seen anyone on HN claim Gates as being non-technical. How it works is simple: I dislike this person, therefore I shall tear them down; I'm unable to be objective about the subject, so I shall be emotional and irrational instead.
  - darkwraithcov 3y ago

wslh 3y ago

> Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. They go on to make some amazing building that gets all sorts of awards and recognition. Is anyone really so naive as to suggest that I am deserving of any credit whatsoever? In the words of Urkel, "Did I do that?" This example doesn't work, at least, since the industrial revolution. If an average person wins the lottery they would need to solve a lot (really a lot) of issues to move a business forward and most probably go bankrupt except if he/she puts the money in low risk financial instruments. There is no "I do that" in the complex world of business. It is a nice Disney story with a few examples. Organization does the work and that includes anonymous engineers, not only CEOs and founders. The great ignition could start at a garage (e.g. Apple) but the road is long.

foobaw 3y ago

You're implying that you knew how to hire and identify smart architects and provided them the right vision to build a good building. There wouldn't be a counterfactual in your hypothetical scenario, but I'm confident that the difference between someone that got lucky and hired "smart" architects versus a visionary doing the same task would be drastic. Money can only get you so far.

bmitc 3y ago
Is there an indication that Altman has a special talent for this over others?
- adventured 3y ago
  Yes, the accomplishments of OpenAI represent that in action. It's an exceptional outcome to say the least. If everybody could do it, they would be doing it. Altman's abilities are every bit as rare as that of a 10x software developer. The same was true of Jobs, and the same is true of Musk (regardless of whether someone likes him or not; who cares if he's likable, it's an infantile emotional derangement to obsess so much over likability).
  - bmitc 3y ago
    > Yes, the accomplishments of OpenAI represent that in action. It's an exceptional outcome to say the least. What specifically backs that up? Didn't others create the technology? Is it that hard to hire and organize when you've got a top researcher that everyone wants to work with? By many accounts, he was just using OpenAI to further other businesses and investments.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      > Is it that hard to hire and organize when you've got a top researcher that everyone wants to work with? Hire a top researcher? Ok, you could get lucky with a few. But keep? Good luck if you are an incompetent manager. If Sam Altman was the "know-nothing" that so many on HN claim him to be, then the top researchers would leave and go to Meta, Google Brain, etc. It makes no sense that this core research team has been so stable. Is this not evidence enough for you?

kortilla 3y ago

> As far as Altman goes, I put him firmly in the same camp as Musk. They haven't done jack shit. What Musk did with SpaceX is in no way comparable to just paying an architect to build a building. Unless the entire biography from Isaacson was fabricated, he was extremely hands on in design decisions, company direction, and hiring. If you think none of those were relevant to the success of spacex, you’re completely delusional.

gamblor956 3y ago
Per dozens of engineers at SpaceX...the biography from Isaacson contains numerous exaggerations and outright fabrications. Elon Musk's involvement in design decisions was limited to the typical executive level involvement in hardware design, in the sense that he was presented multiple options by the engineers and designers and got to pick which one they went with. Indeed, with SpaceX it's usually immediately obvious when Musk was involved: does something fail spectacularly in a way it wasn't supposed to? That was Musk, getting involved in something he didn't understand and overriding the engineers and other professionals. (Contrast the first Starship launch this year, which Musk micromanaged, vs the second launch in November in which he had minimal involvement due to being distracted by X and Tesla.)
- throwaway2037 3y ago
  > Contrast the first Starship launch this year, which Musk micromanaged, vs the second launch in November in which he had minimal involvement due to being distracted by X and Tesla. I tried to a Google search for a source. I cannot find anything. Do you have a good source, or insider information?
- kortilla 3y ago
  This is just made up shit though. None of what you are stating is backed by any sources. >Per dozens of engineers at SpaceX...the biography from Isaacson contains numerous exaggerations and outright fabrications. Which ones, specifically? >the sense that he was presented multiple options by the engineers and designers and got to pick which one they went with. Even if this were the only level of involvement, do you realize how important these are? Do you know how it would have worked out for the company if they focused on payload instead of reusability?

Johnny555 3y ago

VirusNewbie 3y ago
My question would be, is that what Sam does? I wasn't aware that he was involved in building the founding team. I think that's certainly a skill, but I haven't yet heard that's his secret sauce.
- Johnny555 3y ago
  I don't honestly know what he does, but given that he's got both investors and employees loyal to him makes me think that he does a lot more than say "Here's a pile of money, I'm going to lock you smart people in a room and take credit for whatever you come up with"
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    Employees faced losing their equity if the market got spooked, so not sure the petition is objective evidence of loyalty. Apparently some employees near him wanted him out.
    - Johnny555 3y ago
      The petition sure didn't sound like employees trying to get away from Altman: "We, the undersigned, may choose to resign from OpenAI and join the newly announced Microsoft subsidiary run by Sam Altman and Greg Brockman."

matrix_overload 3y ago

>Imagine I win the lottery and hire really smart architects and tell them to make a revolutionary new building. Each one will end up pulling in their own direction, fighting with others over minor things, and nothing will ever get done. Managing smart people, resolving conflicts, and making sure stuff gets done is a rare and underappreciated skill.

tim333 3y ago

The guy's who fund these things deserve some credit for that at least. Take the Medici's for example, bankers who: >claimed to have funded the invention of the piano and opera, financed the construction of Saint Peter's Basilica and Santa Maria del Fiore, and were patrons of Brunelleschi, Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael, Machiavelli, Galileo, and Francesco Redi, among many others in the arts and sciences. Sure they didn't do the paintings but a lot of that stuff probably wouldn't have happened without them.