

Slashdotter on the value of ideas versus execution - alex_c
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1082003&cid=26346961

======
tptacek
I dunno, everyone. I buy that he had the first audio hardware for PCs and got
killed by Creative. But:

* Anycast dates back to 1993, a year before he claims to have "invented" Hopscotch and Digital Island, both of which failed, and neither of which were as technically sophisticated as FastForward or even Akamai.

* Webcams: at least 1995.

* Enumera looks nothing like a "blade server", and it was P4-based, so I'm not seeing how he invented the Cell Processor.

* His "ECIP" protocol is not the first use of FEC codes on the Internet; you could have gotten Reed-Solomon out of the comp.compression FAQ before then. And I feel like maybe Raj Jain "invented" selective acknowledgement. Also: why do you even use SACK in an FEC protocol?

* You can find HTTP cache servers on Google Groups from 1995, a year before he claims to have invented them, and you can find discussions of them dating back to '93.

* "Streaming MP3" wasn't so much invented (streaming video and audio dates back further than the mbone and Internet Talk Radio in 1992) as it was popularized by Shoutcast. The fact that you once hooked an MP3 up to a socket does not make you the inventor of podcasting.

You all think his problem is he needed a Steve Jobs (funny, I think that's
Steve Ballmer's problem right now too). Can I gingerly suggest that his
problem is that he's a crackpot?

~~~
jacobolus
> _You can find HTTP cache servers on Google Groups from 1995, a year before
> he claims to have invented them, and you can find discussions of them dating
> back to '93._

The CERN httpd did caching in 1993 or maybe even before. And the Harvest Cache
(now called Squid) was started at least by 1994.

> _[...] As a result, FTP and HTTP servers find themselves swamped with
> requests for the same popular files, like the demand for images of the
> Shoemaker-Levy 9 comet which saturated NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory's
> wide-area network links in July 1994. As a result, there has been an attempt
> to retrofit caches for internet information system servers like the popular
> CERN proxy-http cache. One recently developed cache which deserves further
> examination is the Harvest cache, which boasts improved performance of an
> order of magnitude over the CERN cache and even over popular http daemons
> like Netscape's Netsite and NCSA's 1.4 httpd._

------
mbreese
I think that he missed one big problem he had... timing. All of the ideas that
he listed, based upon the dates he gives, were well ahead of their time.
Meaning, while they were technically possible, there was no market for them,
or the scale wasn't there.

For example, he lists a CCTV DVR in 1997. There simply wasn't a market for
DVRs in 1997. DVDs were just coming out then, and most people had VCRs. If you
wanted to break into the video recording market, you had to unseat the VCR.
Good luck with that. Then on top of that, hard drives cost many times more
than they do now ($/GB), so in order to have any sort of usable hard drive
space, you would effectively price yourself out of the consumer market. Now,
fast forward a couple of years, and you suddenly have a lot of people without
VCRs who would like to record shows and lower hard drive costs. The market was
primed for a TiVo to show up (actually, I'd argue that TiVo was still a little
early and just barely survived, but that's my unfounded opinion).

Of course, the other major problem that he alludes to was that a lot of his
technology was designed for the adult industry, which may be somewhat
difficult to put on a resume or get investors to take seriously.

~~~
m0nty
Also, wearable computers with VR goggles in 1984? I find that hard to believe,
unless it was so primitive as to be almost useless. I suppose you could have
used a TRS-80 with a B&W LCD display, but the resolution would have been
really poor, and functionality limited. I'm not saying he didn't do it (who
knows?) but it's hard to believe he had a _practical_ product.

~~~
nailer
Patent filings require a proper grasp of language. He's apparently self-filed
quite a few. Surely he should be able to understand basic English?

~~~
robfitz
he mentioned this in a later reply. he's aware of it and always has other
people heavily review and revise everything official. not that i actually
looked at the patent apps, so i could be off.

------
iankt68
What this guy REALLY REALLY needs is a "Steve Jobs" friend. I think he is
technically brilliant, but so was Steve Wozniak, and Apple was really built
through the marketing/business/social skills of Steve Jobs.

Ultimately, for a successful technology company you need both kinds of
personality. Those who can schmooze AND play hardball and those who can invent
brilliant things.

Just my 1.44346 cents (US)

~~~
cookiecaper
I somewhat agree, but I'm frustrated that that's required. I get more and more
disappointed in where our society is at as a whole as I get older. People
shouldn't need a professional brown-noser to flatter them continuously for
weeks until they recognize the verity and feasibility of a product and decide
to purchase it. It's really sad that that's where we're at, I think, sad that
people don't just instantly see through that crap and choose not to waste time
on companies that aren't straight shooters.

I think I have good executive and business sense, but I don't play with most
of these social "norms" that involve constant BS and ass-kissing so it makes
some parts of business hard for me. In fact, I'm in the interview process for
a job right now, and I sent the company letters about why they're having
trouble securing good candidates, and whether I'll get hired anyway is iffy,
but only possible because of the open-mindedness of the owner; if this was
corporate drone company, like another company I applied with and had to
provide programmer-recruitment advice to, I would just be summarily ignored
thereafter. How can people be so vacant, so self-absorbed and oblivious to
basic and sensical things, like being a normal human instead of living to suck
up after your boss and/or potential buyers? It's really upsetting.

This probably doesn't make much sense. My frustration has been pent-up. I have
so much frustration that there's still a lot of it pent now. Thanks for the
outlet though dudes, outlet appreciated.

~~~
cmos
Your sending letters critiquing a company you are trying to get a job from?
And more than one?! You will not get that job, no matter how 'open minded' the
owner is. Right now the owner is hoping someone else applies, and is mulling
over how disruptive you would be to the office.

It's like critiquing someone about their online matchmaking profile on your
first date with them. It's our first date, and I'm quite a catch, but you keep
talking about how my online profile is flawed? Is that really the most
important thing to be discussing right now?

There is a fine line between 'sucking up' and 'being polite'.

The owner doesn't want to hire someone who is going to send him letters every
week about how his company isn't doing things right. That's being judgmental
and condescending.

If you get hired, bring it up the next time they are looking to hire someone.
If you don't get hired, then why do you care?

~~~
cookiecaper
The letters were unsolicited but not completely irrelevant. I wasn't on the
inside and didn't know the inside story, but I'd had a second interview with
them and the lead developer discussed their desperate status and how other
candidates had accepted other offers and/or decided on different career paths
after this company had made offers to them. They made me an offer, actually,
and they were definitely playing lowball, which is one of their primary
mistakes, in my opinion. They'd stated that they appreciated my honesty and
forthrightness in the interview, and given the lead developer's lament over
their inability to attract good help, and in light of the offer twenty grand
under my range, I thought that I might interject. It was a risky move, but it
also presented a good gauge; if the dude can't take politely-worded,
pertinent, and helpful advice from the point-of-view of a potential prospect
advanced in the interview process, presented in a clean, non-harassing manner,
I don't really want to work there.

If the girl in your analogy spent all of the first date talking about how guys
just never seem to call her from her online profile, and then we went our
separate ways, had a second date where the same laments were filed, went away
again, and she made a change to a profile that was stupid, then it would be
risky but sensible to politely inform her of some things that she could do to
improve the appearance of her profile to prospects. That's what happened here.

~~~
cmos
Good point.. It's pretty inappropriate to complain to the person you are
interviewing.

It sounds like they just can't afford you. When we can't afford someone we
often ask them if they would like to work 4 days a week. Sometimes they jump
at the chance!

------
a8w9f
This is the first guy I've come across since reading P.T. Barnum's _The Art of
Money Getting_ (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=310056>) who seems to fit
the description of the "unlucky man":

    
    
      The Rothschilds have another maxim: "Never have anything to
      do with an unlucky man or place." That is to say, never
      have anything to do with a man or place which never
      succeeds, because, although a man may appear to be honest and
      intelligent, yet if he tries this or that thing and always
      fails, it is on account of some fault or infirmity that you
      may not be able to discover but nevertheless which must exist. 
    

The actual (?) Rothschild quote. More mercenary and off-topic:

    
    
      Never have anything to do with an unlucky place, or an
      unlucky man. I have seen many clever men, very clever men,
      who had not shoes to their feet. I never act with them.
      Their advice sounds very well, but they cannot get on
      themselves; and if they cannot do good to themselves, how
      can they do good to me?

~~~
sethg
I'm reminded of the story that one of our VPs told, of a manager who had
received far more applications for a certain job than he had time to look
through. So he took half of the resumes that had piled up on his desk and
said: "These people are unlucky. We do not want to hire unlucky people." And
he threw those resumes in the trash, unread.

~~~
Locke
IIRC, that was a scene in the British version of The Office.

~~~
markessien
That story almost certainly comes from an old book, I read it a long time ago.

------
noonespecial
I think, conversely, this _proves_ its about execution. Assuming that at least
some of his claims are a bit exaggerated (with respect to how far along his
products were).

Executing an idea "almost" just invites a person with better execution and
followthru tho come along and "finish" your product in a way that better suits
the markets.

The rest of the article is just an example of learning the lesson about
trademarks and patents over and over. If you intend to sell a product, there
is a certain amount of homework that you're going to have to do establish
yourself. Even if you don't outright trademark (cheap and easy) or patent
(more expensive and difficult), at least take some steps to prove that you got
there first. This arguably falls into the "execution" category as well.

Its also interesting to me that I've actually heard this story several times
before. I think most geeks who travel well have met a "tech Forrest Gump"
who's story inserts himself in some way into nearly all of the important
technical developments of the last decade, always with an "if only" attached.
An amusing listen for an evening at the bar.. but you don't want one for a
cube-mate!

~~~
cmos
We've all been cornered by Mr. (or Mrs) Unfortunate, where they start by
saying how they invented blah product years before it's time and then Big
Company stole it. I had the great-uncle Jimmy who invented the backlit buttons
on a telephone, only to have it 'stolen' by AT&T years later. Ideas are cheap.
We all have them.

Looking through his resume it would appear he had a lot of fun, doing what he
enjoyed. Yet today all he can muster up is some post blaming everyone else for
his apparent failures and disappointments. I would think he's made a good
living doing all this impressive work. How lucky is he that he can make a
living doing what he, hopefully still, is passionate about?

If he really wants it, he'll find his "Jobs" or "Cuban" to help make it a
reality, though chances are they couldn't stand to be around him. Rule number
one is don't blame others, no matter how obvious or right you may be. Rule
number two is avoid assholes.

My Unkle Jimmy never had another great invention. He was too bitter.

------
lionheart
Can anybody confirm any of his claims?

I would think that somebody who came up with that many new products could get
something to market.

On the other hand, he could be one of those stereotypical tech geniuses who
completely suck at business.

~~~
whacked_new
<http://www.dnull.com/~sokol/jres.html>

He seems to be in the mad scientist category. Apparently he didn't go to
college. It could be that he was so far beyond normal schooling that he
decided it wasn't worth the time. But as do many exceptional people, it
becomes hard to communicate and appeal to normal folk.

~~~
snprbob86
Judging from his home page, he doesn't have any taste. I know that I am
preaching to the choir, but success in business is about making something
people want.

I think that if he found himself a designer to partner with, he would have
been far more successful.

Disclaimer: Yes, I know my own homepage is hideous, so I am a hypocrite. At
least my blog has a standard Blogger theme and my resume is attractive
(currently Facebook-style because I was considering applying last year).

~~~
cturner
> Judging from his home page, he doesn't have any taste.

Go and have a look at the website for blue sky mining companies some times.
Lack of neato art hardly implies bad fundamentals (in fact many of the mining
pages are so bad I half suspect it's a badge of honour).

------
mrtron
In about 1990, when I was very young I had a great idea. I had just read a
book 'How Things Work', which was a huge hardcover book with great pictures
showing how many things work. I came across the generator page and since my
father was a mechanic I figured it would be a good idea to put one on the axle
of a car. So, I took this idea to my father and we made a quick little proof
of concept model, but he explained to me that generators create resistance and
it would result in a net energy loss. But, being a bright young kid I figured
it could be used just during braking so it would help slow the car down AND
produce power!

I never made any money on the idea, and regenerative braking is being used by
most hybrids now.

------
abstractbill
It looks to me like this guy is attempting to create waves, rather than just
riding them.

Creating a technology wave, before the world is ready for it, doesn't appear
to work.

------
DenisM
Remarkably poor writing for someone who has invented a good half of modern
technology.

~~~
brandnewlow
I don't get that criticism at all.

It's a Slashdot comment. He's going to spellcheck it?

Either he did the stuff he says he did, or he didn't. The people reading his
post can figure out what he's trying to say.

~~~
thras
No. The first thing that I noticed about him was that he had bad grammar,
_even for Slashdot_. The poster responded to a questioner and blamed it on
learning disabilities.

Chances are, if this guy is unable to present himself in an articulate manner
on Slashdot, he can't in front of a VC either.

Yes, this is exactly the sort of thing that can prevent success. As can
dressing badly. As can being short and fat. Or ugly, if you're a woman. Fair?
No. But intelligence isn't distributed fairly either.

If you want to sell yourself, then you have to fix as many of these problems
as you can. There's no way around that. If you can't spell, then use Microsoft
Word and its grammar checker on everything you ever write. Go on a diet. Get
someone else to pick out your clothes. Etc.

~~~
azanar
That was quite judgmental. And it might not even be wrong; I am also bothered
to all hell by bad grammar as well, and noticed that about his comment. But
I'm not ready to presume that he will remain as uncollected and scattered when
given the chance to make lengthy preparations for something slightly more
important than a Slashdot post.

That you launch into a litany of other things that have nothing to do with
this guy's Slashdot comment (clothing, physical fitness, etc) suggest a major
chip on your shoulder. You imply that, amongst other things, shortness and
physical unattractiveness are problems that need to be fixed; how exactly do
you propose people fix these problems? This comment smells of either a self-
validating or apologetic cheer toward people who hyper-focus on image at the
expense of all other metrics. If you believe what you write here, and aren't
just resigned to thinking this is how the rest of the world works, I wonder
how many people you've misjudged as a result.

~~~
GHFigs
Do you deny that being inarticulate, unkept, short, obese, or unattractive can
be barriers to success in business?

If so, elaborate on that. If not, please explain why those same things should
_not_ be considered problems that ought to be addressed. Wouldn't it be
advisable to treat the issue like any other and apply the full weight of your
intelligence and experience to come up with a good solution?

~~~
azanar
I was concerned I'd need to elaborate on this a bit more.

I don't deny that any of the above traits can be barriers to success. The
underlying problem I see requiring attention is different, though, than the
problem you and thras suggest we need to solve. When someone encounters
barriers due to their appearance and/or image, the best solution I see does
not always involve individual behavioral modification. I also go looking for
systemic causes. In this case, I think there is a halo effect that is not
being addressed and compensated for, or is being assumed as static and
unmovable. It results in people being judged on things that do matter to the
end product based on things that do not matter. A Porsche is not a faster car
than a Honda because the engineers dressed nicer to the factory, nor the
opposite; it is _tangential_. This halo effect is the thing we need to be
addressing, rather than attempting to rely on patching ourselves due to errors
in the system. I hope my point is a little clearer now.

------
ph0rque
Maybe he should open-source some of his ground-breaking inventions, and earn
fame (if not money) that way...

------
thinkcomp
Perhaps I'm the only one who thinks so, but running a sustainable business is
rarely accomplished by relying upon a popular aphorism that is itself a false
dichotomy, which, were it even true, would still not shine very much light on
the many complexities of "success."

I find this saying particularly irksome because "execution" is a catch-all
term that people use to place blame where it often doesn't belong. (The
biotech company Fluidigm had to cancel its IPO recently. Did its executives
"fail to execute" a plan to guard against declining economic conditions?
Really now.)

There are far better ways to analyze successes and failures in business.

~~~
alex_c
I agree, and I think the author of that comment agrees as well. If anything,
he's arguing that even waving a magical "execution" wand around isn't enough
for success, let alone just having a valuable idea. I wrote that title because
the context of the discussion is a student worried about having his ideas
stolen.

------
fallentimes
It takes two, baby.

------
zmimon
His post reads like an advertisement for the E-Myth book ...

(<http://www.e-myth.com/pub/htdocs/emr_ch1>)

------
chaostheory
his post is reminiscent of captain crunch

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper>

------
time_management
_As soon as Microsoft or Real Video or some other big company with deep
pockets took notice, that was the end for me._

Sad. Copyrights were designed to protect small authors from the massive
publishing houses, with whose distribution the small author could never
compete. Patents were founded on the same principle. It's pretty upsetting
that these are now being used by the large corporations to establish hegemony,
whereas the "little guy" almost certainly doesn't have the money necessary to
hold his own ground.

~~~
Retric
I don't think patents should protect people when the solution is obvious. Take
a DVR 20,000+ people probably thought up the idea of using HDD to store tv
programs it was just a question of when a cheep HDD would become large enough.
Push / Pull email to hand held devices is a stupid patent.

What should be protected is novel solutions to problems. Take a product that's
in production and make it better by changing it's shape slightly so you get
more leverage and that's worthy of a patent.

