4 ms·

> And I see the flip side, people that are past the age of 50 [...] are not capable of creating compelling social products. This tells me everything I need to

> And I see the flip side, people that are past the age of 50 [...] are not capable of creating compelling social products. This tells me everything I need to know about this ass monkey.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
jcrites 14y ago
What does it tell you? I am trying to understand what you mean. Do you believe every person the author met over the age of 50 is in fact capable of building compelling social products, and that the author has misjudged them?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
cookiecaper 14y ago
Your ellipses excludes some important context: >people that are past the age of 50 and are trying to start a mobile, local, social startup but really are not capable Not "all people past the age of 50 -are- incapable", just people who are so incapable they don't recognize the credibility they lack due to external influential but not necessarily exclusive factors like their age, background, and appearance. I think all of us could rattle off a list of 50+ year old "geezers" that could pull something like this off, but the reality is that many of them can barely use a cell phone. If your presentation doesn't include measures to address that assumed, pre-programmed credibility gap, which often means just talking about things in a way that demonstrates you know what you are talking about and actually can navigate around Android, then you likely don't (yet) have the realism or the drive necessary to make something go. The 50+ remark is just a way to say "This guy looks like he can barely use Outlook", or "This guy is out of touch". Perhaps not the most well-considered illustration, but I think we can get the OP's point without throwing a politically correct hissy-fit.
- shard 14y ago
  Ageism is just as inappropriate as sexism or racism. The tech industry seems to be going through growing pains with respect to sexism, but ageism is apparently still widely acceptable.
  - cft 14y ago
    At some point in life it becomes hard to do something you have not done before. You can get better at what you are already doing (e.g. Going from 20bn to 40bn like Warren Buffett after 60), but it's harder to go from 0 to 1m, since this involves new stuff, a qualitative change.
- notJim 14y ago
  The problem is associating "50+" with "cannot build social startup". If the 50+ part was irrelevant, then he wouldn't have mentioned it.
  - cookiecaper 14y ago
    As I said, I read that line as an illustration of an obvious incongruity between the company the founder is trying to pitch and the perception of the background and qualifications of the founder. Age plays into this, and if the 50+ founder doesn't have a strong history in compsci/startups/whatever, the assumptions generally attached to 50+-year-old sales people will stick. As such, the founder will need to recognize that he needs to establish credibility with the audience before he can successfully sell them on his ultra-hip location-aware social tweeter app. Generalizations and stereotypes are a reality that founders must shape to their advantage.
    - notJim 14y ago
      > Generalizations and stereotypes are a reality that founders must shape to their advantage. I think this is ultimately true. Whether the bias is justified or not, the best founders will be aware of it and work to make up for it. The same could be said for bias against women in technology, for example. That being said, I still believe this bias is wrong, and am concerned that this VC so publicly shared it, because to me, his publicly sharing it indicates that he's not even aware there's anything wrong with it. I do not believe a 50 year-old should have to work any harder than a 24 year-old in proving that they have what it takes to run a social startup.

> And I see the flip side, people that are past the age of 50 [...] are not capable of creating compelling social products. This tells me everything I need to know about this ass monkey.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

jcrites 14y ago

What does it tell you? I am trying to understand what you mean. Do you believe every person the author met over the age of 50 is in fact capable of building compelling social products, and that the author has misjudged them?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

cookiecaper 14y ago

Your ellipses excludes some important context: >people that are past the age of 50 and are trying to start a mobile, local, social startup but really are not capable Not "all people past the age of 50 -are- incapable", just people who are so incapable they don't recognize the credibility they lack due to external influential but not necessarily exclusive factors like their age, background, and appearance. I think all of us could rattle off a list of 50+ year old "geezers" that could pull something like this off, but the reality is that many of them can barely use a cell phone. If your presentation doesn't include measures to address that assumed, pre-programmed credibility gap, which often means just talking about things in a way that demonstrates you know what you are talking about and actually can navigate around Android, then you likely don't (yet) have the realism or the drive necessary to make something go. The 50+ remark is just a way to say "This guy looks like he can barely use Outlook", or "This guy is out of touch". Perhaps not the most well-considered illustration, but I think we can get the OP's point without throwing a politically correct hissy-fit.

shard 14y ago
Ageism is just as inappropriate as sexism or racism. The tech industry seems to be going through growing pains with respect to sexism, but ageism is apparently still widely acceptable.
- cft 14y ago
  At some point in life it becomes hard to do something you have not done before. You can get better at what you are already doing (e.g. Going from 20bn to 40bn like Warren Buffett after 60), but it's harder to go from 0 to 1m, since this involves new stuff, a qualitative change.
notJim 14y ago
The problem is associating "50+" with "cannot build social startup". If the 50+ part was irrelevant, then he wouldn't have mentioned it.
- cookiecaper 14y ago
  As I said, I read that line as an illustration of an obvious incongruity between the company the founder is trying to pitch and the perception of the background and qualifications of the founder. Age plays into this, and if the 50+ founder doesn't have a strong history in compsci/startups/whatever, the assumptions generally attached to 50+-year-old sales people will stick. As such, the founder will need to recognize that he needs to establish credibility with the audience before he can successfully sell them on his ultra-hip location-aware social tweeter app. Generalizations and stereotypes are a reality that founders must shape to their advantage.
  - notJim 14y ago
    > Generalizations and stereotypes are a reality that founders must shape to their advantage. I think this is ultimately true. Whether the bias is justified or not, the best founders will be aware of it and work to make up for it. The same could be said for bias against women in technology, for example. That being said, I still believe this bias is wrong, and am concerned that this VC so publicly shared it, because to me, his publicly sharing it indicates that he's not even aware there's anything wrong with it. I do not believe a 50 year-old should have to work any harder than a 24 year-old in proving that they have what it takes to run a social startup.