3 ms·

YC should put integrity and ethics of founders as a key variable for funding.

by sreekanth850 1y ago

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
3D30497420 1y ago
Unfortunately, that would probably get in the way of making money.
lynx97 1y ago
> integrity and ethics How do you evaluate that?
- close04 1y ago
  The easiest way to check for integrity and ethics is if the startups YC finances routinely run afoul of YC's ethics code or the law. If YC has no ethics code, that's your answer right there. If they do but it fails to mention basic things like lying, cheating, deceiving especially when done intentionally, bingo again. If breaking the law isn't an automatic termination of the collaboration, it takes you to the same conclusion. If YC explicitly supports the startups when knowing about these problems, or implicitly by skirting due diligence and turning a blind eye, or accepts startups having no commitment to an ethics code, then ethics or integrity are not core values, or even are completely absent. There are more nuanced topics and methods but if it doesn't pass the smell test with the basic ones, it won't pass it with any.
  - sokoloff 1y ago
    GGP was clearly in the context of “how would YC evaluate this pre-funding?” rather than “how would outsiders evaluate YC?” but 15 seconds of search turned up: https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics
    - close04 1y ago
      > 15 seconds of search turned up ...some latent passive aggressiveness and YC's founder ethics code not YC's own ethics code. You need an anchor for the chain of trust. That must be the VC's (YC in this case) integrity and ethics code first. You stopped reading after the first few words, misunderstood even those, and rushed to answer didn't you? I addressed exactly how to evaluate ethics and integrity prefunding, and ensure it post with 2 very simple concepts that would have worked perfectly at least for this easy to catch incident: 1) Do your due diligence. In this case "15 seconds of search" would have turned up the original code and the license mismatch. 2) Have clauses to ensure breaches of law or ethics have severe consequences to the founders. The founders indisputably breached YC's founder ethics code, in particular "Being honest in the YC application and interview process" and "Generally operating in good faith and behaving in a professional and upstanding way". Or maybe the founders were honest and YC accepted this but then we circle back YC's own ethics code. YC had means to check for this prefunding, and has means to deal with the problem now. If there's no transparency that any of this happened, it didn't happen. So the point of "checking integrity and ethics" becomes moot.
      - sokoloff 1y ago
        I don’t believe I misunderstood these words of yours, and provided you a ready reference to check for yourself whether YC had a code of ethics and whether that code contained the elements you were hand-wringing about. > If YC has no ethics code, that's your answer right there. If they do but it fails to mention basic things like lying, cheating, deceiving especially when done intentionally, bingo again. -------- > YC had means to check for this prefunding How would YC check in December 2024 for a copyright violation that was discovered in July 2025 and probably happened in 2025 during the batch (after funding)? This is indeed a problem that Pickle/YC have to deal with, but I'm not nearly convinced that this was findable in 15 seconds pre-funding. YC's funded over 4000 companies. How many have had ethics scandals of any size? Less than 5%? Less than 2%? They're betting on founders, probably rejecting some on ethics grounds, and trying to nudge those funded to stay ethical while being aggressively fast. If they're hitting over 95% "no scandals", that's pretty good from a 2 page application and 15 minute interview process.
factsaresacred 1y ago
I follow a bunch of YC founders on X. Lots of behavior that could be construed as 'growth hacking - or 'deceptive' depending on your bent: promoting open source libraries that don't work, rewriting tweets from smaller accounts, coordinated replies from mutuals and so on. I guess that's the game, but they do seem a lot more cavalier about it of late. Increasingly resembles the crypto 'community' (derogatory).
dragonwriter 1y ago
I am sure they do. I am not sure that they weigh it in the direction you are thinking of, though.
fud101 1y ago
That would mean YC needs to reinvent itself first. That's not happening.
Hamuko 1y ago
There's no integrity and ethics in AI, and the money's at AI.

YC should put integrity and ethics of founders as a key variable for funding.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

3D30497420 1y ago

Unfortunately, that would probably get in the way of making money.

lynx97 1y ago

> integrity and ethics How do you evaluate that?

close04 1y ago
The easiest way to check for integrity and ethics is if the startups YC finances routinely run afoul of YC's ethics code or the law. If YC has no ethics code, that's your answer right there. If they do but it fails to mention basic things like lying, cheating, deceiving especially when done intentionally, bingo again. If breaking the law isn't an automatic termination of the collaboration, it takes you to the same conclusion. If YC explicitly supports the startups when knowing about these problems, or implicitly by skirting due diligence and turning a blind eye, or accepts startups having no commitment to an ethics code, then ethics or integrity are not core values, or even are completely absent. There are more nuanced topics and methods but if it doesn't pass the smell test with the basic ones, it won't pass it with any.
- sokoloff 1y ago
  GGP was clearly in the context of “how would YC evaluate this pre-funding?” rather than “how would outsiders evaluate YC?” but 15 seconds of search turned up: https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics https://www.ycombinator.com/ethics
  - close04 1y ago
    > 15 seconds of search turned up ...some latent passive aggressiveness and YC's founder ethics code not YC's own ethics code. You need an anchor for the chain of trust. That must be the VC's (YC in this case) integrity and ethics code first. You stopped reading after the first few words, misunderstood even those, and rushed to answer didn't you? I addressed exactly how to evaluate ethics and integrity prefunding, and ensure it post with 2 very simple concepts that would have worked perfectly at least for this easy to catch incident: 1) Do your due diligence. In this case "15 seconds of search" would have turned up the original code and the license mismatch. 2) Have clauses to ensure breaches of law or ethics have severe consequences to the founders. The founders indisputably breached YC's founder ethics code, in particular "Being honest in the YC application and interview process" and "Generally operating in good faith and behaving in a professional and upstanding way". Or maybe the founders were honest and YC accepted this but then we circle back YC's own ethics code. YC had means to check for this prefunding, and has means to deal with the problem now. If there's no transparency that any of this happened, it didn't happen. So the point of "checking integrity and ethics" becomes moot.
    - sokoloff 1y ago
      I don’t believe I misunderstood these words of yours, and provided you a ready reference to check for yourself whether YC had a code of ethics and whether that code contained the elements you were hand-wringing about. > If YC has no ethics code, that's your answer right there. If they do but it fails to mention basic things like lying, cheating, deceiving especially when done intentionally, bingo again. -------- > YC had means to check for this prefunding How would YC check in December 2024 for a copyright violation that was discovered in July 2025 and probably happened in 2025 during the batch (after funding)? This is indeed a problem that Pickle/YC have to deal with, but I'm not nearly convinced that this was findable in 15 seconds pre-funding. YC's funded over 4000 companies. How many have had ethics scandals of any size? Less than 5%? Less than 2%? They're betting on founders, probably rejecting some on ethics grounds, and trying to nudge those funded to stay ethical while being aggressively fast. If they're hitting over 95% "no scandals", that's pretty good from a 2 page application and 15 minute interview process.

factsaresacred 1y ago

I follow a bunch of YC founders on X. Lots of behavior that could be construed as 'growth hacking - or 'deceptive' depending on your bent: promoting open source libraries that don't work, rewriting tweets from smaller accounts, coordinated replies from mutuals and so on. I guess that's the game, but they do seem a lot more cavalier about it of late. Increasingly resembles the crypto 'community' (derogatory).

dragonwriter 1y ago

I am sure they do. I am not sure that they weigh it in the direction you are thinking of, though.

fud101 1y ago

That would mean YC needs to reinvent itself first. That's not happening.

Hamuko 1y ago

There's no integrity and ethics in AI, and the money's at AI.