8 ms·

Stay in the Building

62 points by nate 13y ago

jacalata 13y ago
This is how silicon valley ends up working entirely on problems faced by young single tech-savvy american college graduates with disposable income.
- kunle 13y ago
  Draft is a product that helps you write better. I use it, and it's excellent. There are writers everywhere, and have been throughout history. I'd hardly call that "problems faced by young single tech-savvy american college graduates with disposable income."
  - stevewilhelm 13y ago
    But I suspect the "writers" market is a relatively small and spends very little on tools and services.
- jtheory 13y ago
  I agree, and see this as a big argument for "getting out of the building" not to look for ideas, and not even to validate existing ideas, but just to live more life. If you're really skilled at using tech to solve problems, pretty soon you won't have any problems that have much overlap with the vast majority of the human population. It's like a mini-superpower. So, make an artificial constraint to open your mind a bit, like writers & poets do. Work for free, start from scratch; get out of the building/city/state/country. Do things that are hard for you; you have a better safety net than most people do. Your problems will still be different from most people's, but you'll pick up new passions, new interests, and you'll find new problems that interest you (which you can develop in the new building for a while, if you like).
alxbrun 13y ago
It's true that the excessive need for external validation kills many startups. A pattern I've seen over and over (and I fell myself in that trap once) is: A startup wants to disrupt an industry by making a self-served, SMB targeted product (think Zendesk). But they want external validation. Actually you can understand that: their bank account, their family, their ego want external validation. So they start reaching out to large enterprises. A few of these enterprises become customers and start to dictate the product roadmap. Soon enough, the startup has forgotten its self-served, SMB, disrupting vision and joined the ranks of the old-school vendors it wanted to disrupt.
- majc2 13y ago
  I might be misunderstanding, but are you implying there is something wrong with that pattern? To me, it's a founders choice, and in my book there is nothing wrong with changing from the original disruptive idea - and selling something else that clients want to buy (enterprise or otherwise). Is it not a better fate than trucking along with a product that doesn't have enough customers to meet its cost base?
mindcrime 13y ago
I really, really, really hate to be "that guy", but, but... I think the author of TFA is misunderstanding the idea behind Lean Startup and Customer Development if he thinks "get out of the building" means "go out and find an idea for a startup". Steve Blank states very specifically in The Four Steps To The Epiphany that you start from the idea that the founder has in his head. The "get out of the building" bit means to get out and validate that there is actually a market for the thing you are building, and - if you can't find a market for it - then (and only then) modify the idea or change ideas. It's totally fine to have your own idea about something new that you think the world needs, and to start building it without any external validation. The mistake that the "lean startup" movement is warning against, is to waste years of time, and millions of dollars, building something that nobody wants. This is why "customer development" runs in parallel with "product development". So yeah, stay in the building long enough to come up with an idea, build a prototype if you feel the need, then "get out of the building" and show people the alternative to "a faster horse" that you've developed. This really isn't a binary situation anyway... any successful businesses is going to involve a mix of your own "inside the building" ideas and "outside the building" validation. The goal is to find the right balance. I think Steve Blank and his peers would argue that, in the past, there was too much emphasis on the "inside the building" part and that people waited far too late to "get outside the building". But don't over-interpet that to mean that everything happens "outside the building".
- gruseom 13y ago
  I find the article more subtle, and rooted in much more experience, than you're giving it credit for. When people talk about the lean theory they often leap from "Don't make something no one wants", which is a truism, to "this theory tells you how to validate what you're building and thus how to make something people want", which is an enormous claim, and they never seem to address the abyss between the two. (It's a bit like the "?" step of the underpants gnomes, or that old physics cartoon where "Then a miracle occurs" appears on a blackboard amidst the equations.) Nate's post does address it. That's why it's interesting. It's a mistake to respond by saying that he must not understand the theory.
  - 13y ago
jmduke 13y ago
The huge assumption that Nathan makes here is that "problems I have" can always be extended to "problems that a profitable target market has." You can spend 24 hours a day researching a given topic, sure, but it's still going to take a lot of research to catch up to someone who's been living engrossed in that topic for years and years. I'm reminded of the great comment thread for Storage for Photographers, where the most valuable insights were given by actual photographers saying "Hey, this is what we would absolutely pay money for."(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6020969 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6020969)
- gruseom 13y ago
  The huge assumption that Nathan makes here is that "problems I have" can always be extended to "problems that a profitable target market has." You're surely right that that assumption is invalid, but I don't think he is making it. He's saying that if you operate from "problems I have", you're in a much stronger position than if you rely on external feedback alone. Both your point and his can be true. Of course, the two add up to a big problem—but that's because this stuff is hard. There's no system for making it easier.
unoti 13y ago
Before I clicked on this article, I had just been thinking about some game design ideas. I figured they weren't worth writing down, that I'd think them up again later if I needed them. Then I read that awesome Mitch Hedberg quote, which is clearly applicable to more than just jokes: "I sit at my hotel at night, I think of something that’s funny, then I go get a pen and I write it down. Or if the pen’s too far away, I have to convince myself that what I thought of ain’t funny." - Mitch Hedberg
6d0debc071 13y ago
If you're going to go from a personal problems position, then it makes sense to try to make personal problems resemble the problems of the system you're trying to approach. Getting a temporary job in the industry you're interested in is a great way to find out what problems it has, IME.
darkhorn 13y ago
Why so many writers do not write a real introduction. Why I should read all the text in order to understand the message? Just write an intro, it is not hard.
samd 13y ago
"This weekend I was in front of a TV and people were watching Randy To The Rescue." Funny use of language there, especially given he goes on to explain the episode and quote from it. I think that means you were watching television. Which is ok! Don't worry! You're allowed to watch television, even shows like Randy to the Rescue. I won't think less of you for it.
Spearchucker 13y ago
It's as mindcrime says. When I hear/read people asking for ideas (or bemoaning the lack of one) I get a bit sad. I get sad because ideas come from experience. Not technical experience (although that's a good source too), but life experience. Snowboarding. Working a part time job. Doing Krav Maga. Working for a huge, ugly corporate. Each of these is the source of an awesome idea I have (I have seven that have legs). Here's one of them. Go talk to a !good! DTP guy at a media company like Ogilvy[1]. Ask him or her about the conflict of interest between the sales guy, the artist, and the DTP guy. And then think about a SaaS job-card workflow system for media houses that uses labels for tagging jobs, tracks changes to EVERYTHING, including hours spent on a job per person and job stage, provides an audit trail, and approvals process. These guys have serious pain. I've got a conceptual architecture I'm happy to share. [1] I choose Ogilvy in particular for two reasons - first obviously, because I know a good DTP guy at Ogilvy. Second, because they're one of the largest media houses in the world, and still have problems with something as simple as getting a print ad campaign out the door for say, British Airways.

62 points by nate 13y ago

This is how silicon valley ends up working entirely on problems faced by young single tech-savvy american college graduates with disposable income.

kunle 13y ago
Draft is a product that helps you write better. I use it, and it's excellent. There are writers everywhere, and have been throughout history. I'd hardly call that "problems faced by young single tech-savvy american college graduates with disposable income."
- stevewilhelm 13y ago
  But I suspect the "writers" market is a relatively small and spends very little on tools and services.
jtheory 13y ago
I agree, and see this as a big argument for "getting out of the building" not to look for ideas, and not even to validate existing ideas, but just to live more life. If you're really skilled at using tech to solve problems, pretty soon you won't have any problems that have much overlap with the vast majority of the human population. It's like a mini-superpower. So, make an artificial constraint to open your mind a bit, like writers & poets do. Work for free, start from scratch; get out of the building/city/state/country. Do things that are hard for you; you have a better safety net than most people do. Your problems will still be different from most people's, but you'll pick up new passions, new interests, and you'll find new problems that interest you (which you can develop in the new building for a while, if you like).

alxbrun 13y ago

It's true that the excessive need for external validation kills many startups. A pattern I've seen over and over (and I fell myself in that trap once) is: A startup wants to disrupt an industry by making a self-served, SMB targeted product (think Zendesk). But they want external validation. Actually you can understand that: their bank account, their family, their ego want external validation. So they start reaching out to large enterprises. A few of these enterprises become customers and start to dictate the product roadmap. Soon enough, the startup has forgotten its self-served, SMB, disrupting vision and joined the ranks of the old-school vendors it wanted to disrupt.

majc2 13y ago
I might be misunderstanding, but are you implying there is something wrong with that pattern? To me, it's a founders choice, and in my book there is nothing wrong with changing from the original disruptive idea - and selling something else that clients want to buy (enterprise or otherwise). Is it not a better fate than trucking along with a product that doesn't have enough customers to meet its cost base?

mindcrime 13y ago

I really, really, really hate to be "that guy", but, but... I think the author of TFA is misunderstanding the idea behind Lean Startup and Customer Development if he thinks "get out of the building" means "go out and find an idea for a startup". Steve Blank states very specifically in The Four Steps To The Epiphany that you start from the idea that the founder has in his head. The "get out of the building" bit means to get out and validate that there is actually a market for the thing you are building, and - if you can't find a market for it - then (and only then) modify the idea or change ideas. It's totally fine to have your own idea about something new that you think the world needs, and to start building it without any external validation. The mistake that the "lean startup" movement is warning against, is to waste years of time, and millions of dollars, building something that nobody wants. This is why "customer development" runs in parallel with "product development". So yeah, stay in the building long enough to come up with an idea, build a prototype if you feel the need, then "get out of the building" and show people the alternative to "a faster horse" that you've developed. This really isn't a binary situation anyway... any successful businesses is going to involve a mix of your own "inside the building" ideas and "outside the building" validation. The goal is to find the right balance. I think Steve Blank and his peers would argue that, in the past, there was too much emphasis on the "inside the building" part and that people waited far too late to "get outside the building". But don't over-interpet that to mean that everything happens "outside the building".

gruseom 13y ago
I find the article more subtle, and rooted in much more experience, than you're giving it credit for. When people talk about the lean theory they often leap from "Don't make something no one wants", which is a truism, to "this theory tells you how to validate what you're building and thus how to make something people want", which is an enormous claim, and they never seem to address the abyss between the two. (It's a bit like the "?" step of the underpants gnomes, or that old physics cartoon where "Then a miracle occurs" appears on a blackboard amidst the equations.) Nate's post does address it. That's why it's interesting. It's a mistake to respond by saying that he must not understand the theory.
- 13y ago

jmduke 13y ago

The huge assumption that Nathan makes here is that "problems I have" can always be extended to "problems that a profitable target market has." You can spend 24 hours a day researching a given topic, sure, but it's still going to take a lot of research to catch up to someone who's been living engrossed in that topic for years and years. I'm reminded of the great comment thread for Storage for Photographers, where the most valuable insights were given by actual photographers saying "Hey, this is what we would absolutely pay money for."(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6020969 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6020969)

gruseom 13y ago
The huge assumption that Nathan makes here is that "problems I have" can always be extended to "problems that a profitable target market has." You're surely right that that assumption is invalid, but I don't think he is making it. He's saying that if you operate from "problems I have", you're in a much stronger position than if you rely on external feedback alone. Both your point and his can be true. Of course, the two add up to a big problem—but that's because this stuff is hard. There's no system for making it easier.

unoti 13y ago

Before I clicked on this article, I had just been thinking about some game design ideas. I figured they weren't worth writing down, that I'd think them up again later if I needed them. Then I read that awesome Mitch Hedberg quote, which is clearly applicable to more than just jokes: "I sit at my hotel at night, I think of something that’s funny, then I go get a pen and I write it down. Or if the pen’s too far away, I have to convince myself that what I thought of ain’t funny." - Mitch Hedberg

6d0debc071 13y ago

If you're going to go from a personal problems position, then it makes sense to try to make personal problems resemble the problems of the system you're trying to approach. Getting a temporary job in the industry you're interested in is a great way to find out what problems it has, IME.

darkhorn 13y ago

Why so many writers do not write a real introduction. Why I should read all the text in order to understand the message? Just write an intro, it is not hard.

samd 13y ago

"This weekend I was in front of a TV and people were watching Randy To The Rescue." Funny use of language there, especially given he goes on to explain the episode and quote from it. I think that means you were watching television. Which is ok! Don't worry! You're allowed to watch television, even shows like Randy to the Rescue. I won't think less of you for it.

Spearchucker 13y ago

It's as mindcrime says. When I hear/read people asking for ideas (or bemoaning the lack of one) I get a bit sad. I get sad because ideas come from experience. Not technical experience (although that's a good source too), but life experience. Snowboarding. Working a part time job. Doing Krav Maga. Working for a huge, ugly corporate. Each of these is the source of an awesome idea I have (I have seven that have legs). Here's one of them. Go talk to a !good! DTP guy at a media company like Ogilvy[1]. Ask him or her about the conflict of interest between the sales guy, the artist, and the DTP guy. And then think about a SaaS job-card workflow system for media houses that uses labels for tagging jobs, tracks changes to EVERYTHING, including hours spent on a job per person and job stage, provides an audit trail, and approvals process. These guys have serious pain. I've got a conceptual architecture I'm happy to share. [1] I choose Ogilvy in particular for two reasons - first obviously, because I know a good DTP guy at Ogilvy. Second, because they're one of the largest media houses in the world, and still have problems with something as simple as getting a print ad campaign out the door for say, British Airways.