9 ms·
Ask PG: What Changed?
Two years ago, you referred to the question, "Please tell us about the time you most successfully hacked some (non-computer) system to your advantage" as "one of the questions we pay most attention to when judging applications."[1]
But, as recently as a few months ago you said, "How you hacked some real-world system to your advantage is not a super important question. Probably not even in the top 10."[2]
So, why is the question not as evocative as you once thought?
[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html
[2] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693870
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jevans 14y agoThat's not true. The article's claim was that an example of hacking a non-computer system was the "2nd most important question."
- cesarsalazar12 14y agoI went back and read both the thread and the original article and I think the OP is right.
- pg 14y agoThere are 35 questions on the application. A question can be one we consistently pay attention to without being in the top 10. Also, we added at least 2 new questions we care about more since we added that one. (The field names of one or both of those may be those of previously existing questions, but we changed the question itself in a way that made the answer more important.)
- noibl 14y ago> A question can be one we consistently pay attention to without being in the top 10. Sure, but the query was about "pay most attention to". I wonder if hacking the YC app process via PR stunt became too obvious an answer to the question over time.
- rxs 14y ago> Sure, but the query was about "pay most attention to". If you interpret that as "pay most attention to (when questions are ranked by the amount of attention we've paid them over all rounds)", nobody gets killed and we can all go home.
- doctorpangloss 14y agoI love how the details captivate people. I think it's because your 'admissions technology' is so advanced it is indistinguishable from magic. And people love learning magic tricks.
- robryan 14y agoI think one issue might be that everyone knows about this question and primed by the earlier comments on the importance might end up over optimising this. There might end up being lots of really impressive answers to this question that didn't correlate well with results. In earlier rounds when less people that were applying knew the question it might have been a better indicator.
- JohnsonB 14y agoNothing changed, it was never a good question. There are many ways to be productive, entrepreneurial, and creative while working "within the system", so the question was intrinsically discriminatory to those who did so.
- stephengillie 14y agoI never really understood the question that well. I was considering applying on a couple of occasions, but this question always made me reconsider.
- amackera 14y agoIt's possible that it's there for precisely this reason. I've also filled out a few mock applications and get stumped on this one too.
- raverbashing 14y agoExactly If you can't fill the application form, you're already out I guess it makes sense, if you can hack (in the traditional meaning of the word) something outside of 'tech' this shows that you understand something about entrepreneurs sometimes having to play with the rules or thinking outside of the box (which does not mean doing something illegal)
- droithomme 14y agoI've assumed it means cases like you were faced with some bureaucratic wall that was an impediment to getting things done, and you figured a way around them. It doesn't necessarily imply unethical behavior, though I'm sure if the example someone gave was of illegal or unethical behavior that would be important information for the questioner to consider. Sometimes this sort of practice is called social engineering, knowing how to work the system, or being street smart. It could even refer to starting a grass roots campaign to get a bad law changed. To succeed in business you need to be able to solve difficult non-technical problems as well as technical. Rather than based on logic, the answer may be based on insights into human behavior, loopholes, or just understanding practical matters of dealing with red tape. This question gives the person an opportunity to discuss cases where they did so successfully.
- ceejayoz 14y agoI'd guess it's the same reason no one asks "what's your greatest weakness" to job applicants any more. Everyone's been trained to come up with an answer like "oh, I guess it's that I just work so damned hard all the time!"
- xugle 14y ago"My passion for software often leads me to ignore work-life balance. I'm making a conscious effort to take time out to exercise and eat right so my all night hacking sessions are even more productive."
- sherm8n 14y agoThis reminds me of the way people answer how you know people need what you're making. Everyone says they've validated the idea with users or talked to users. When you start getting deeper in the conversation you can tell they've only scratched the surface level. They don't know users all that much. I guess people are starting to be trained how to answer the question. The only person they're fooling is themselves though.
- rdl 14y agoIt must be weird having everything you say picked apart -- it's like being the Pope or Alan Greenspan. Interesting with Greenspan we ended up with sort of a reaction to the previous tea-leaves reading by Bernanke -- he's vastly more transparent and communicates really boring things.
- pyalot2 14y agoBeing famous, successful and surrounded by padawans does that to you.
- redler 14y agoIt's not a terrible question, but it's really not that different from more common corporate-speak interview questions like, "We like 'out of the box' thinkers here. Does that describe you, and if so, how?" If anything, it's an easier version of that question, since it primes the applicant with the hint of considering responses outside the standard domain. It makes sense to me that pg doesn't consider this a top ten question.
- codex 14y agoStop turning over PG's every word like some soon-to-be unemployed English major. It is pathetic. You need experience with the real world through use, and not by the cool reflected glow of the Internet on your monitor.
- jacques_chester 14y agoThe analogy I'd make is with theologians: carefully teasing apart the meaning of every. single. word. because the payoff is eternal bliss/admission to YC.
- siglesias 14y ago1) The hit against English majors was entirely unnecessary. 2) I don't see how experiencing the real world would have gotten him any closer to the answer. HN seems to be a perfectly reasonable forum to ask. There might have been something interesting there.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- amorphid 14y agoThere are days when I think majoring in English would have been more valuable than majoring in business.
- sgentle 14y agoI think you're being unnecessarily confrontational. The question is a valid one. If you're hoping to apply to a fund led by someone, and that someone says "we pay the most attention to how you can hack stuff", then it'd be pretty silly not to try to demonstrate that ability. Even in the real world where there is no Internet or computer monitors, knowing the goals of the people you're applying to is pretty fundamental.
- RegEx 14y agoLook everyone... It's a STEM guy! I agree that the pg worship is weird, but there's no need to be so hostile.
- JimWillTri 14y agoHow about the possibility that every batch of new admissions is a learning experience. No one has all the answers to what makes a great startup. You live and learn every day.