5 ms·

So this right there bespeaks the wrong motivation. "Strike it rich" implies fame and impact. You are arguing terminology. Do you want a guy like this at your

So this right there bespeaks the wrong motivation. "Strike it rich" implies fame and impact. You are arguing terminology. Do you want a guy like this at your company? This is absolutely poisonous from a culture perspective. Absolutely. I will always choose people who work smart over people who work "hard". Always. As to being poisonous, if someone refusing to give up the life balance is "poison", it's because you already are on life support. Astonishing how much narrative you've invented in your reply.

temphn 14y ago
"Strike it rich" implies fame and impact. You are arguing terminology. They are not the same. Wikipedia, Khan Academy, Linux and Rails are fame and impact. Github is smaller than Zynga but has much higher status in the programming community. You can't go long years with low salary if you are motivated by money. This isn't just double think, the kind of people who achieve high economic status via startups usually care more about social status and proving something to themselves and the world than fancy cars. That is why Peter Thiel talks about CEOs paying themselves a low wage as the best predictor of startup success.
- huggyface 14y ago
  Wikipedia, Khan Academy, Linux and Rails are fame and impact. Jimmy Wales is worth some $25 million, and basically lives his life off the Wikipedia books. Linus can write his own ticket anywhere, and has virtually unlimited potential. Rails....partner at 37 Signals. If you have fame and impact you can almost always convert that into a lot of cold, hard cash.
  - temphn 14y ago
    Right, but it's about the psychological state. Jimmy Wales made his money outside of Wikipedia. Linus wasn't doing Linux to get rich. If you read their bios, the Google guys weren't thinking about getting rich. Of all the recent crop of successful startups, maybe only Mark Pyncus was really focused on getting rich. It's a bit zen but there is a good way to tell the difference. A successful startup founder, when presented with the choice between more money and more power, will take power every time.

temphn 14y ago

"Strike it rich" implies fame and impact. You are arguing terminology. They are not the same. Wikipedia, Khan Academy, Linux and Rails are fame and impact. Github is smaller than Zynga but has much higher status in the programming community. You can't go long years with low salary if you are motivated by money. This isn't just double think, the kind of people who achieve high economic status via startups usually care more about social status and proving something to themselves and the world than fancy cars. That is why Peter Thiel talks about CEOs paying themselves a low wage as the best predictor of startup success.

huggyface 14y ago
Wikipedia, Khan Academy, Linux and Rails are fame and impact. Jimmy Wales is worth some $25 million, and basically lives his life off the Wikipedia books. Linus can write his own ticket anywhere, and has virtually unlimited potential. Rails....partner at 37 Signals. If you have fame and impact you can almost always convert that into a lot of cold, hard cash.
- temphn 14y ago
  Right, but it's about the psychological state. Jimmy Wales made his money outside of Wikipedia. Linus wasn't doing Linux to get rich. If you read their bios, the Google guys weren't thinking about getting rich. Of all the recent crop of successful startups, maybe only Mark Pyncus was really focused on getting rich. It's a bit zen but there is a good way to tell the difference. A successful startup founder, when presented with the choice between more money and more power, will take power every time.