5 ms·

I don't know whether VCs have changed, so much as they've either pushed themselves or been pushed into an inappropriate role. A large part of it is that big co

I don't know whether VCs have changed, so much as they've either pushed themselves or been pushed into an inappropriate role. A large part of it is that big companies have given up on trying to innovate (they just buy innovations, at a panic price) and the people from whom innovation typically came are now a pariah caste of almost-unemployable miserable geniuses. Even worse, those people can't raise funding anymore because they've been outcompeted (for attention, press, and funding) by people with superior social polish but shittier ideas. VCs are private equity guys. For deciding whether two $300-million biotech companies should merge, they're probably the best people out there. It's not that they're "good" at making those calls, but that the companies are so complex and unusual that almost no one is, and they're the most adept at figuring out what's going on amid the chaos. They might be able to tease out a +0.02 correlation in decision-making while the rest of us would get zero. For figuring out who has the competence to start a tech company? They're in the dark. Not a clue among them. It's not what they learned in business school or McKinsey. They'd do 100 times better to have a person like me do the talent scouting/vetting, but for a variety of reasons that will never happen. The real evil isn't VCs so much as it's the replacement of R&D by M&A, representing a wide-scale trend of engineer disempowerment. Being a software engineer used to be an R&D job because non-engineers understood that they didn't know how to do that job, so it got a lot of autonomy and trust. Now, it's being treated as commodity work, and the result is a catastrophic dilution of the industry. VCs aren't singularly to blame for this, but they certainly didn't stop it. It was actually a lot better, for engineers, to be in R&D labs of large companies than it is to be an engineer at a VC-istan startup. You had more career growth and more opportunities to learn stuff. Don't be fooled by the bullshit equity handed out now. Sure, these R&D engineers didn't get rich at 27-- they had to strike out on their own to do that, and many were happy being upper-middle-class technology researchers as a lifelong career, so most never did-- but most VC-istanis don't either. We need to bring back the R&D flavor of the software industry, or we'll have lost the industry for good.

dasil003 13y ago
I tend to view the tech R&D golden age as a product of post-war prosperity and the unique advantages the US had during the latter half of the 20th century. Trust between corporations and employees, and indeed the longevity of corporations themselves has now been so eroded that no one is willing to continue playing the long game of R&D. Take into account the insanity of how the patent system protects all the wrong people and has on balance the exact opposite of its intended effect, and I see the current situation as a bit of a Darwinian inevitability. Being a software engineer is still a kick-ass job compared to almost anything else out there today.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  Being a software engineer is still a kick-ass job compared to almost anything else out there today. No, I really don't think so. If I were to do it over again, I would rather be an Alaskan fishing boat operator than a software engineer doing 99% of the stuff that paid programmers have to do. My body is mediocre. It works, there's nothing wrong with it, and I'm probably in the top 33% for physique, but I'm not Olympic material, so using my body for mediocre physical work does not offend me. It seems about right. I think I would be happier in medieval times when there was no expectation that a smart person would do high-quality work. You did harsh physical work for 45 years and then died. Seems more fulfilling than this corporate bullshit where a bunch of well-connected high priests don't merely do less work and make more money, but the fuckers think they earned it! My mind, on the other hand, is Olympic material and any time someone tries to coerce me into using it for the grunt work they don't want to do, it just makes me homicidal.
  - dasil003 13y ago
    I have go call bullshit on this. You are probably younger than every Alaskan fishing boat operator today and you could go do that tomorrow if you really wanted. Also, why would it be better to pay 80% of your labor directly to a king who would let you starve after a bad harvest or two than it would be to deal with some douchey suits? I mean you can't really be serious with this, it's just a diatribe against the existing corporate hegemony, am I wrong?
    - dangrover 13y ago
      It's funny, I actually met a guy once who worked on Alaskan fishing boats and decided to move into programming. I don't think he regretted the move.
    - rayiner 13y ago
      > Also, why would it be better to pay 80% of your labor directly to a king who would let you starve after a bad harvest or two than it would be to deal with some douchey suits? Most of the time its literally the same thing: pay 80% of the value of your labor to someone who doesn't care if you starve in a drought.
pnathan 13y ago
If you read a few of Dijikstra's comments from the 70s and 80s, I think you'll find the software industry was a wreck then too.
hkmurakami 13y ago
I had the great opportunity of interning at HP Labs during my Junior year summer, and it was (in its own way) the kind of R&D haven that you describe. My team was comprised purely of PhD scientists, many of them former Xerox Parc exiles from down the road. Brilliant, wonderful people who could spend decades as engineers and researchers and be appreciated for their technical contributions. It definitely had to deal with the corporate mandates, but (at least in my team) the team manager was a player/manager (MIT PhD who could do EE, ME, and CS) who was quite deft at managing the politics. I imagine the place is being slowly eroded, especially given how poorly the company has been doing as of late, which is really a shame and I wish I were in a position to do something about it.
- jfoutz 13y ago
  I think you nailed it right there. Corporate R&D can be the best of the best, but there's no default mechanism to turn that brillance into money.
btilly 13y ago
There is a fundamental problem in everything that you say. The VCs may be private equity guys, but they have learned to pay attention to what is said by angels and early seed investors. Who in turn frequently got that way by being in successful startups. Which really did compete on merit. And those people know plenty about programming. As a case in point look no farther than ycombinator itself. I first heard of Paul Graham because he was a well-known Lisp hacker, and when I was starting in programming I was told to read a book of his to open my eyes to how much I did not understand. (I did read On Lisp and highly recommend it.) I first heard of Robert Morris because he famously accidentally took down the internet. They got the money with which they started ycombinator by running their own startup. And every year they identify dozens of unconnected but talented people as people who deserve a chance, and suddenly some kid whose main qualification is that they could impress some talented hackers is in one of the most prestigious inner circles in the Valley. And yes, part of what they look for is the "social polish" that you deride. Because they've learned that you need some of that to make your business succeed. And yes, they will help you learn how to spin yourself successfully. Because that also helps in the real world. But in the end they give a first step up to a lot of people who then go on to build everything from better online analytics to motorcycles that won't fall over.
- wging 13y ago
  >motorcycles that won't fall over Which company is this?
  - jessaustin 13y ago
    The 4th link down: https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=motorcycle+fall+over&start=0 https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=motorcycle...
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    Lit Motors. Which reminds me, I meant to reserve one.
- anonyfuss 13y ago
  You've bought into the startup porn a little too much. YC is a startup mill -- they make a TINY investment, and it doesn't matter if most of them fail. The failed founders make a HUGE investment, and its on their head that the majority of the cost of failure sits. YC floats on a bubble of spit and polish and politics. They want people like you to buy into it, because they need to take advantage of people like you.
narrator 13y ago
>A large part of it is that big companies have given up on trying to innovate (they just buy innovations, at a panic price) and the people from whom innovation typically came are now a pariah caste of almost-unemployable miserable geniuses. Why innovate when the miserable genius idea generates a 10% cap rate and you can borrow from your wall street pals for 3% and run the company like crap so it only generates a 5% cap and it still makes money? The miserable genius eco-system has very expensive money. Meanwhile, up in the wall street/VC jet stream, money is easy to come by.
kyllo 13y ago
That term, "R&D," it sounds so retro and quaint! I guess a lot of large corporations and their shareholders have stopped thinking that they can or want to do creative/innovative work, and have decided to focus on doing repetitive work more profitably.

dasil003 13y ago

I tend to view the tech R&D golden age as a product of post-war prosperity and the unique advantages the US had during the latter half of the 20th century. Trust between corporations and employees, and indeed the longevity of corporations themselves has now been so eroded that no one is willing to continue playing the long game of R&D. Take into account the insanity of how the patent system protects all the wrong people and has on balance the exact opposite of its intended effect, and I see the current situation as a bit of a Darwinian inevitability. Being a software engineer is still a kick-ass job compared to almost anything else out there today.

michaelochurch 13y ago
Being a software engineer is still a kick-ass job compared to almost anything else out there today. No, I really don't think so. If I were to do it over again, I would rather be an Alaskan fishing boat operator than a software engineer doing 99% of the stuff that paid programmers have to do. My body is mediocre. It works, there's nothing wrong with it, and I'm probably in the top 33% for physique, but I'm not Olympic material, so using my body for mediocre physical work does not offend me. It seems about right. I think I would be happier in medieval times when there was no expectation that a smart person would do high-quality work. You did harsh physical work for 45 years and then died. Seems more fulfilling than this corporate bullshit where a bunch of well-connected high priests don't merely do less work and make more money, but the fuckers think they earned it! My mind, on the other hand, is Olympic material and any time someone tries to coerce me into using it for the grunt work they don't want to do, it just makes me homicidal.
- dasil003 13y ago
  I have go call bullshit on this. You are probably younger than every Alaskan fishing boat operator today and you could go do that tomorrow if you really wanted. Also, why would it be better to pay 80% of your labor directly to a king who would let you starve after a bad harvest or two than it would be to deal with some douchey suits? I mean you can't really be serious with this, it's just a diatribe against the existing corporate hegemony, am I wrong?
  - dangrover 13y ago
    It's funny, I actually met a guy once who worked on Alaskan fishing boats and decided to move into programming. I don't think he regretted the move.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    > Also, why would it be better to pay 80% of your labor directly to a king who would let you starve after a bad harvest or two than it would be to deal with some douchey suits? Most of the time its literally the same thing: pay 80% of the value of your labor to someone who doesn't care if you starve in a drought.

pnathan 13y ago

If you read a few of Dijikstra's comments from the 70s and 80s, I think you'll find the software industry was a wreck then too.

hkmurakami 13y ago

I had the great opportunity of interning at HP Labs during my Junior year summer, and it was (in its own way) the kind of R&D haven that you describe. My team was comprised purely of PhD scientists, many of them former Xerox Parc exiles from down the road. Brilliant, wonderful people who could spend decades as engineers and researchers and be appreciated for their technical contributions. It definitely had to deal with the corporate mandates, but (at least in my team) the team manager was a player/manager (MIT PhD who could do EE, ME, and CS) who was quite deft at managing the politics. I imagine the place is being slowly eroded, especially given how poorly the company has been doing as of late, which is really a shame and I wish I were in a position to do something about it.

jfoutz 13y ago
I think you nailed it right there. Corporate R&D can be the best of the best, but there's no default mechanism to turn that brillance into money.

btilly 13y ago

There is a fundamental problem in everything that you say. The VCs may be private equity guys, but they have learned to pay attention to what is said by angels and early seed investors. Who in turn frequently got that way by being in successful startups. Which really did compete on merit. And those people know plenty about programming. As a case in point look no farther than ycombinator itself. I first heard of Paul Graham because he was a well-known Lisp hacker, and when I was starting in programming I was told to read a book of his to open my eyes to how much I did not understand. (I did read On Lisp and highly recommend it.) I first heard of Robert Morris because he famously accidentally took down the internet. They got the money with which they started ycombinator by running their own startup. And every year they identify dozens of unconnected but talented people as people who deserve a chance, and suddenly some kid whose main qualification is that they could impress some talented hackers is in one of the most prestigious inner circles in the Valley. And yes, part of what they look for is the "social polish" that you deride. Because they've learned that you need some of that to make your business succeed. And yes, they will help you learn how to spin yourself successfully. Because that also helps in the real world. But in the end they give a first step up to a lot of people who then go on to build everything from better online analytics to motorcycles that won't fall over.

wging 13y ago
>motorcycles that won't fall over Which company is this?
- jessaustin 13y ago
  The 4th link down: https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=motorcycle+fall+over&start=0 https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=motorcycle...
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  Lit Motors. Which reminds me, I meant to reserve one.
anonyfuss 13y ago
You've bought into the startup porn a little too much. YC is a startup mill -- they make a TINY investment, and it doesn't matter if most of them fail. The failed founders make a HUGE investment, and its on their head that the majority of the cost of failure sits. YC floats on a bubble of spit and polish and politics. They want people like you to buy into it, because they need to take advantage of people like you.

narrator 13y ago

>A large part of it is that big companies have given up on trying to innovate (they just buy innovations, at a panic price) and the people from whom innovation typically came are now a pariah caste of almost-unemployable miserable geniuses. Why innovate when the miserable genius idea generates a 10% cap rate and you can borrow from your wall street pals for 3% and run the company like crap so it only generates a 5% cap and it still makes money? The miserable genius eco-system has very expensive money. Meanwhile, up in the wall street/VC jet stream, money is easy to come by.

kyllo 13y ago

That term, "R&D," it sounds so retro and quaint! I guess a lot of large corporations and their shareholders have stopped thinking that they can or want to do creative/innovative work, and have decided to focus on doing repetitive work more profitably.