3 ms·

> What you're probably feeling is that they're not making things that show up on Hacker News that you're excited about. I disagree. What I'm feeling is that th

> What you're probably feeling is that they're not making things that show up on Hacker News that you're excited about. I disagree. What I'm feeling is that the large majority of students don't even know it's an option. Especially when you move out of CS. I've heard people with great ideas for products who never did anything with them because they had no idea how to. That's what we aim to fix. If someone wants to build something, and start a startup, they sure as hell should be able to. Georgia Tech has the resources out there, with VentureLab, ATDC, Flashpoint, etc, but you can't keep throwing money and programs at something and expect the culture to change. You need dedicated, motivated students for that. > My advice to undergraduates is thus to build something more difficult than you at first think that you can complete, and write a couple of blog posts about what you have done. I completely agree. It's an incredibly rewarding process. > If you instead set out to "learn rails and do a startup", my prediction is that you'll slowly learn that most people talk a big game, web programming is more annoying and complicated than difficult, and making money is hard; all of which I can convince you of in 5 minutes. Everything you say there is completely correct, but I'd argue it's a very valuable experience, and you even if/when you fail with that first startup, you come out with a tonne of skills and valuable insight. Maybe the first time around you didn't do any customer discovery. The second time around, you'll make damn sure there are customers before you build. And really, how many successful startup founders make it the first time. If you're going to fail, it's a hell of a lot better to fail in college where you have a support network to fall back on, and a backup plan if you absolutely can't handle it.

ynniv 13y ago
What I'm feeling is that the large majority of students don't even know it's an option. Honestly, at that level it kind of isn't. If you don't agree, you probably also think that high schoolers would benefit from starting businesses, which suggests more that you're a businessman among engineers than that engineers should be learning to run businesses. There are two sides to a successful startup, business and technical, and post-bubble you probably don't have the technical side fulfilled as an undergrad. Failing because you have a half baked implementation looks a lot like failing because you didn't find the right customers, so now you learned the wrong lesson. The second time around, you'll make damn sure there are customers before you build. This means your first startup was wasted because you weren't even thinking about the most basic aspects. You didn't learn anything other than that you started off clueless, which a mentor would have saved you from. I'd argue it's a very valuable experience, and you even if/when you fail with that first startup, you come out with a tonne of skills and valuable insight. You'll learn a lot from a failed startup, but I don't think that you'll learn as much as if you worked for a startup instead. Learning by direct experiment is less efficient than learning from someone else's mistakes, which is the whole reason you're at a university to begin with. You would probably be better served by a weekly study of actual startups - how they began, what they created, how they ended, and invite local founders (business and technical) to speak. Combine that with a non-profit technical project that delivers a product and tracks adoption but avoids the requirements of profitable business and you'll impress the community while building a résumé that will help you raise VC when the time comes. Anyone can throw pasta at the wall; Tech can do better than that.
- timtamboy63 13y ago
  > you probably don't have the technical side fulfilled as an undergrad I completely disagree. To used an incredibly cliched example - Zuck and Facebook. Let's just theoretically say that Georgia Tech has a Zuck, who has this great idea and the capability to build it. if people are saying "At [an undergrad] level it kind of isn't [an option]", you just killed what could have been an amazing product. Undergrads have the technical skills required, there is absolutely no denying that. And if they don't, they'll go off and learn them. It's 2013, MOOCs are everywhere. You can learn whatever the hell you want with enough dedication. > This means your first startup was wasted because you weren't even thinking about the most basic aspects. You didn't learn anything other than that you started off clueless, which a mentor would have saved you from. I never mentioned not having a mentor. I think it's incredibly important to have a mentor, and we're pushing that as hard as we can with Startup Semester > You'll learn a lot from a failed startup, but I don't think that you'll learn as much as if you worked for a startup instead. Learning by direct experiment is less efficient than learning from someone else's mistakes, which is the whole reason you're at a university to begin with. Completely agree with this. We're building ties with local ATL startups and hooking up students who want an internship with these startups. Realistically, it's a terrible idea to have everyone start a startup, and I think that's what you think our goal is. It absolutely isn't. We just want to raise awareness around the fact that working for/starting a startup is a valid option for an undergrad.
  - ynniv 13y ago
    To used an incredibly cliched example - Zuck and Facebook. A poor example. Zuckerberg was very lucky that he stumbled onto something that his modest PHP and design skills didn't kill, and eight years and 5,000 employees later Facebook still doesn't make enough money (it's trading at 10 times the normal P/E). Every couple days someone wins the lottery, but it's foolish to make a profession out of playing. Undergrads have the technical skills required, there is absolutely no denying that. Respectfully, they don't. They can build things, but they aren't at the level that the public currently expects from our industry. Joining a startup with seasoned engineers gives you more realistic and productive feedback than the average user is able to provide. We just want to raise awareness around the fact that working for/starting a startup is a valid option for an undergrad. This is excellent, and why people are paying attention.

ynniv 13y ago

What I'm feeling is that the large majority of students don't even know it's an option. Honestly, at that level it kind of isn't. If you don't agree, you probably also think that high schoolers would benefit from starting businesses, which suggests more that you're a businessman among engineers than that engineers should be learning to run businesses. There are two sides to a successful startup, business and technical, and post-bubble you probably don't have the technical side fulfilled as an undergrad. Failing because you have a half baked implementation looks a lot like failing because you didn't find the right customers, so now you learned the wrong lesson. The second time around, you'll make damn sure there are customers before you build. This means your first startup was wasted because you weren't even thinking about the most basic aspects. You didn't learn anything other than that you started off clueless, which a mentor would have saved you from. I'd argue it's a very valuable experience, and you even if/when you fail with that first startup, you come out with a tonne of skills and valuable insight. You'll learn a lot from a failed startup, but I don't think that you'll learn as much as if you worked for a startup instead. Learning by direct experiment is less efficient than learning from someone else's mistakes, which is the whole reason you're at a university to begin with. You would probably be better served by a weekly study of actual startups - how they began, what they created, how they ended, and invite local founders (business and technical) to speak. Combine that with a non-profit technical project that delivers a product and tracks adoption but avoids the requirements of profitable business and you'll impress the community while building a résumé that will help you raise VC when the time comes. Anyone can throw pasta at the wall; Tech can do better than that.

timtamboy63 13y ago
> you probably don't have the technical side fulfilled as an undergrad I completely disagree. To used an incredibly cliched example - Zuck and Facebook. Let's just theoretically say that Georgia Tech has a Zuck, who has this great idea and the capability to build it. if people are saying "At [an undergrad] level it kind of isn't [an option]", you just killed what could have been an amazing product. Undergrads have the technical skills required, there is absolutely no denying that. And if they don't, they'll go off and learn them. It's 2013, MOOCs are everywhere. You can learn whatever the hell you want with enough dedication. > This means your first startup was wasted because you weren't even thinking about the most basic aspects. You didn't learn anything other than that you started off clueless, which a mentor would have saved you from. I never mentioned not having a mentor. I think it's incredibly important to have a mentor, and we're pushing that as hard as we can with Startup Semester > You'll learn a lot from a failed startup, but I don't think that you'll learn as much as if you worked for a startup instead. Learning by direct experiment is less efficient than learning from someone else's mistakes, which is the whole reason you're at a university to begin with. Completely agree with this. We're building ties with local ATL startups and hooking up students who want an internship with these startups. Realistically, it's a terrible idea to have everyone start a startup, and I think that's what you think our goal is. It absolutely isn't. We just want to raise awareness around the fact that working for/starting a startup is a valid option for an undergrad.
- ynniv 13y ago
  To used an incredibly cliched example - Zuck and Facebook. A poor example. Zuckerberg was very lucky that he stumbled onto something that his modest PHP and design skills didn't kill, and eight years and 5,000 employees later Facebook still doesn't make enough money (it's trading at 10 times the normal P/E). Every couple days someone wins the lottery, but it's foolish to make a profession out of playing. Undergrads have the technical skills required, there is absolutely no denying that. Respectfully, they don't. They can build things, but they aren't at the level that the public currently expects from our industry. Joining a startup with seasoned engineers gives you more realistic and productive feedback than the average user is able to provide. We just want to raise awareness around the fact that working for/starting a startup is a valid option for an undergrad. This is excellent, and why people are paying attention.