3 ms·

I am going to be a complete fool and say the opposite. Starting up is easier than everyone says. Reasons? The cost is really low. You don't have to quit your

by mrtron 19y ago

I am going to be a complete fool and say the opposite. Starting up is easier than everyone says. Reasons? The cost is really low. You don't have to quit your job. You don't have to invest a lot into your company. If things start to do well, you can afford to do both. What really is the cost? The cost is your time, and if it is something you enjoy, its a win-win situation. Am I defining a hobby? Sure, but starting up can be exactly that. There are advantages to quitting your job and investing every penny you can, but that isn't for everyone. So starting up is really easy. Write some code, release a project. If it doesn't do well, it was fun. If it does do well, keep the ball rolling. If you can't get anything started while you are working full time, I would suggest you will be unsuccessful if you quit your job too.

mnemonicsloth 19y ago
You left out the sentence that starts with "I learned on my own startup..." Why?
- mrtron 19y ago
  Can you rephrase that? I don't know if you are curious or trying to make some sort of strawman argument. If you are curious, I am sorry I can't spill many details. But I have done a startup and several projects in the past, and am currently involved in a startup. If you are implying I don't know anything because I haven't done it myself...well I guess I answered that. I also have quite a few friends who have done startups to pull some anecdotal evidence from.
  - mnemonicsloth 19y ago
    A straw man is a proxy, a fake, a stand-in for the real thing. So to make a straw man argument, I have to distort something you've said so that it becomes easier to refute. Feel free to explain how I can do this when your post is reproduced verbatim above mine. You meant argumentum ad hominem (advanced by a loaded question, even!). Technically, it's not relevant to startups' degree of ease whether you've been successful as a founder or not, but it is valid for me to ask you to cite your evidence. You claim to be an expert on startups based on evidence you can't reveal. That's a circular appeal to authority (yourself) established by an appeal to a higher power (all your friends' top-secret successes). I don't want to be (too much of) a pompous ass here, but I get jumpy when people try to convince me of things that are both improbable and highly desirable.
    - mrtron 19y ago
      No, the strawman you were presenting was that I had no idea about this topic because I had not experienced it myself. That is a fallacy, and it is untrue in this situation. I did not mean it was a loaded question, I wasn't sure whether you were being a jerk or not. Clearly, you were trying to be a pompous ass, and are again with this second comment. I hardly claim to be an expert, I CLEARLY stated to have some anecdotal evidence. I was simply giving some comments based on my experiences, and whether you choose to believe me is your prerogative. Lastly, how is it improbable that starting a startup is easy? Any software developer can write their own software in a short period of time, and try to start a business based on it.
      - andreyf 19y ago
        mnemonicsloth, mrtron - are you two dating? (serious question, you sound like a couple I know)
        deleted 19y ago
        [deleted]
        mnemonicsloth 19y ago
        This is my first meeting with mrtron, so I don't think we're dating (unless you mean 'by LiveJournal standards', in which your guess would be as good as mine). I'm engaged in the real world. We fight all the time.
      - jsnx 19y ago
        Your use of 'strawman' is incorrect.
        mrtron 19y ago
        I hate 'arguing' this way, but no it is not. Straw man: Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated. He was presenting me as someone who had no experience with a startup, thus shooting down my arguments about the ease of starting up. Explain how this is incorrect? He presents me as an individual with no experience with startups. He then uses that to attempt to shoot down my arguments.
cstejerean 19y ago
Some perhaps would like to think that succeeding at a startup is somehow easier than become a professional basketball player. Sure you can play basketball in your spare time and all you need to do is buy a basketball and a pair of shorts, but all that means is that playing basketball isn't hard, becoming a successful is. Heck, the article didn't claim that starting a startup is hard. It claimed that "startups" are hard. Which is meant to prepare folks for the fact that if you want to succeed it's going to be hard. And that's something a lot of folks don't get.

by mrtron 19y ago

mnemonicsloth 19y ago

You left out the sentence that starts with "I learned on my own startup..." Why?

mrtron 19y ago
Can you rephrase that? I don't know if you are curious or trying to make some sort of strawman argument. If you are curious, I am sorry I can't spill many details. But I have done a startup and several projects in the past, and am currently involved in a startup. If you are implying I don't know anything because I haven't done it myself...well I guess I answered that. I also have quite a few friends who have done startups to pull some anecdotal evidence from.
- mnemonicsloth 19y ago
  A straw man is a proxy, a fake, a stand-in for the real thing. So to make a straw man argument, I have to distort something you've said so that it becomes easier to refute. Feel free to explain how I can do this when your post is reproduced verbatim above mine. You meant argumentum ad hominem (advanced by a loaded question, even!). Technically, it's not relevant to startups' degree of ease whether you've been successful as a founder or not, but it is valid for me to ask you to cite your evidence. You claim to be an expert on startups based on evidence you can't reveal. That's a circular appeal to authority (yourself) established by an appeal to a higher power (all your friends' top-secret successes). I don't want to be (too much of) a pompous ass here, but I get jumpy when people try to convince me of things that are both improbable and highly desirable.
  - mrtron 19y ago
    No, the strawman you were presenting was that I had no idea about this topic because I had not experienced it myself. That is a fallacy, and it is untrue in this situation. I did not mean it was a loaded question, I wasn't sure whether you were being a jerk or not. Clearly, you were trying to be a pompous ass, and are again with this second comment. I hardly claim to be an expert, I CLEARLY stated to have some anecdotal evidence. I was simply giving some comments based on my experiences, and whether you choose to believe me is your prerogative. Lastly, how is it improbable that starting a startup is easy? Any software developer can write their own software in a short period of time, and try to start a business based on it.
    - andreyf 19y ago
      mnemonicsloth, mrtron - are you two dating? (serious question, you sound like a couple I know)
      - deleted 19y ago
        [deleted]
      - mnemonicsloth 19y ago
        This is my first meeting with mrtron, so I don't think we're dating (unless you mean 'by LiveJournal standards', in which your guess would be as good as mine). I'm engaged in the real world. We fight all the time.
    - jsnx 19y ago
      Your use of 'strawman' is incorrect.
      - mrtron 19y ago
        I hate 'arguing' this way, but no it is not. Straw man: Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated. He was presenting me as someone who had no experience with a startup, thus shooting down my arguments about the ease of starting up. Explain how this is incorrect? He presents me as an individual with no experience with startups. He then uses that to attempt to shoot down my arguments.

cstejerean 19y ago

Some perhaps would like to think that succeeding at a startup is somehow easier than become a professional basketball player. Sure you can play basketball in your spare time and all you need to do is buy a basketball and a pair of shorts, but all that means is that playing basketball isn't hard, becoming a successful is. Heck, the article didn't claim that starting a startup is hard. It claimed that "startups" are hard. Which is meant to prepare folks for the fact that if you want to succeed it's going to be hard. And that's something a lot of folks don't get.