4 ms·
@pmarca has an interesting thread on this on Twitter [1]. In Peter Thiel’s terminology [2], PG’s view is optimistic nondeterminate, which might be fine for a VC
by asimjalis 12y ago
@pmarca has an interesting thread on this on Twitter [1]. In Peter Thiel’s terminology [2], PG’s view is optimistic nondeterminate, which might be fine for a VC but might not be the best choice for a founder.
[1] https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/546533509922160640 https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/546533509922160640
[2] http://blakemasters.com/post/23435743973/peter-thiels-cs183-startup-class-13-notes http://blakemasters.com/post/23435743973/peter-thiels-cs183-...
- ThomPete 12y agoAnd def not fine for the 99% of the working population.
- napoleond 12y agoUnfortunately Thiel's views don't really map to a "hard" 2x2 matrix--the axes should be considered to represent spectra or gradients instead. (I'm not presuming to be smarter than Thiel here, just extrapolating rationally... nobody believes the future to be entirely determinate or entirely indeterminate.) In light of that, I suspect PG and Thiel actually live in the same quadrant of determinate optimism. I haven't read PG suggest that we should just "wait" for the future to happen--he's merely suggesting that the most common path toward building the future is on a wave. (And Thiel built PayPal that way--he recognized a version of the future that was on the cusp of being realized and took it upon himself to make it happen.)