
What Kate saw in Silicon Valley - albertcardona
http://paulgraham.com/kate.html
======
edw519
_9\. What a solitary task startups are._

This is the hardest thing for me to explain to others. And still one of the
hardest for me to get used to myself. It takes a lot of time working alone to
get anything done.

It may also be one of the many reasons Hacker News is so popular. I don't know
about you guys, but if I didn't have this place to break up the loneliness,
I'd probably go nuts.

~~~
kyro
I am in no way trying to be disrespectful here, but if you rely on an online
forum to keep you from going crazy, you might want to consider restructuring
your priorities and workflow to give you a little more time to breathe and
enjoy life. An online community is great and all, but there are millions of
other, more tangible and real world, things that can be as, if not and most
likely more, rewarding than participating on HN.

~~~
randallsquared
_there are millions of other, more tangible and real world, things that can be
as, if not and most likely more, rewarding than participating on HN._

Well, that depends strongly on the person, doesn't it? :)

~~~
kyro
The point of that comment was to what? Refute that there aren't other things
more rewarding than HN and dependent on the type of person, having HN be the
only thing keeping you from insanity is perfectly fine and healthy?

Apologies for sounding trollish, but I'm somewhat shocked at the reactions
here. We have someone telling us that they work themselves into such a lonely
place that the only thing keeping them sane is HN, and yet no one is
suggesting he reorder his life and find a better balance so that he can find
more enjoyment.

~~~
randallsquared
Well, I don't actually think that edw519 is, in actual fact, in danger of
going insane due to loneliness, since I assumed, as I would guess most did,
that he was using "go nuts" casually, in the way that people say things like,
"Wow, if the Cubs don't win the Series after _that_ streak, I'll just die"
without meaning that they will actually cease living should their team fail.

I don't think you're sounding trollish, but I do think you may not be treating
this forum as a casual social setting in which people sometimes make
statements to convey a feeling, rather than because they are literally true.

Edit: I forgot to say:

I also think that for a lot of people who hang out here, and to a lesser
extent on proggit, etc, this online community really is one of the most fun,
engaging things they have available to do. Conversation online with those who
are interested in similar topics could easily trump conversation in person
with those whose interests bore you. Even if we grant that being in the real
world is an important attribute of "fun things to do", it's unlikely to be the
most important.

~~~
kyro
I get the casual context, but that's not to say there could still be an
imbalance. I do agree with the rest of your comment and will try and not take
things a little too literally.

------
netsp
_By inverting this list, we can get a portrait of the "normal" world._

I suspect that this observation has something to do with the last PG essay to
hit HN about putting yourself in the centre.

If you take any list of characteristics that you apply to a group, it will
tend to contrast them with the 'norm.' Invert it and you get their perspective
on the rest of the world, especially if the list is self authored.

Imagine a group of Uzbeki expats in Rotterdam commenting on themselves.
They'll come up with a list of traits that make them stand out from the crowd.
Invert it and you have their perspective on the Dutch. The problem/advantage
of this trick is that you might end up with a list of fairly marginal (in the
eyes of a non-Uzbeki) or unremarkable traits.

------
apsurd
I don't always understand why everyone is _so extremely_ hung up on PG. I
respect the guy, but he's human after all.

Anyway, this might have something to do with it:

 _"By inverting this list, we can get a portrait of the "normal" world. It's
populated by people who talk a lot with one another as they work slowly but
harmoniously on conservative, expensive projects whose destinations are
decided in advance, and who carefully adjust their manner to reflect their
position in the hierarchy."_

That made me smile for about 30 mins. Awesome.

~~~
sp332
It's not _everyone_ , its just that PG fanatics are... more concentrated here.

------
apu
pg/jl/tlb/rtm: as you're primarily advisors and investors now, do you feel
like you've started adopting any habits of VCs (either positive or negative)?

~~~
pg
Interesting question.

Not all investors are VCs. There are also angel investors, and we are much
more like angels, both in our backgrounds and the part of the startup world we
occupy. Angels don't have a lot of habits, either good or bad. They're mostly
just individuals who got rich from their own startups; their personalities are
not much affected by being investors.

The one thing that makes us different from angels is that we invest on such a
large scale. We have a brand name and an office and a web site and all that.
Would that engender any habits, though? I can't think of any.

I definitely don't think we have any of the habits of VCs that are mentioned
in this list. The fact that VCs dress up and try to project an aura of power
comes from being finance guys, not VCs per se; investment bankers are the same
(and in fact are indistinguishable to me). And we don't have the luxury of
being sheep, because we have to decide whether or not to invest in a company
the same day we meet them.

~~~
ivankirigin
Has managing your own fund affected how you think about the upside of
startups?

~~~
pg
You mean the money we raised this spring? No, that hasn't changed anything. We
still operate as if we were investing our own money-- which is what I'd want
if I were an LP, actually.

~~~
netsp
Is it different money or is it just mixed in with YC's personal investments?

~~~
pg
It's different money. We raised a fund, just a very small one; structurally
that's the only way to do it.

------
dgabriel
I've always thought of "scrappy," as more like an indomitable underdog, not
someone belligerent (which has negative connotations) or necessarily
undignified.

~~~
jwecker
It comes from old-school boxing. "Inclined to fight" was the original meaning.
Bellicose is closer than belligerent. Certainly undignified, traditionally at
least. In the last few decades it has been used for underdogs, as in "he's
small but scrappy-" giving it that positive implication you mention- small but
always ready to fight. Think scrappy-doo

------
nuweborder
Great insight. Launch fast and iterate. Learn from mistakes, edit, and
continue to build something that people want.

The "Founder" next door is like "The Millionaire Nextdoor".Keeping it simple,
frugal, and staying cash-flow positive wins the game. This is why your
millionaire next door and your founder next door are probably one in the same.
Similar philosophies.

------
ivankirigin
I'm not sure most people could tolerate the risk of failure. I think the
change for the future is that large organizations will be collections of small
groups run like startups, but without the large update and downside.

~~~
billswift
I doubt that could successfully be done more than rare occasions, for some of
the problems see Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma"
[http://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Dilemma-Revolutionary-
Busin...](http://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Dilemma-Revolutionary-Business-
Essentials/dp/0060521996/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251752578&sr=8-1)

------
yannis
>Kate Courteau is the architect who designed Y Combinator's office. Recently
we managed to recruit her to help us run YC when she's not busy with
architectural projects. I was scratching my head on this one - thinking why a
person with architectural skills would be chosen to help run YC - and then it
struck me that originality and creativity is perhaps the hallmarks of YC or am
I missing something?

~~~
maxklein
YC is a business of friends. The companies are made of friends, they try to
get startups who come as friends, they try to make startups become friends.

~~~
yannis
Great reply maxklein, thank you.

------
dschobel
_2\. How much startups' ideas change. As usual, by Demo Day about half the
startups were doing something significantly different than they started with._

If this is really true (and I fully believe that it is), why not just
interview individuals like a job interview rather than have them pitch ideas?

If you know the resulting product is almost certainly not going to look
anything like what they're proposing, I would just try to swing some on-campus
interviews at Stanford and UC Berkeley, hire the kids based on smarts &
personality and then put them in a room and only then start talking about
ideas.

Why bother reviewing their initial ideas at all (other than as an indicator of
the aforementioned smarts & personality)?

~~~
apsurd
Ah you see, your premise is wrong. To go looking for someone is the polar
opposite of how to find capable founders, very simply because it implies they
need to be found. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think your ideas are
too academic. You don't just "go to a college and find entrepreneurs".

There certainly is value in the _effort_ one engages in when self-developing,
self-formulating, self-revising, self-actualizing, self-motivating, self-
preserving and finally self-sticking-your-neck-out, which is what the YC
process is sort of about.

In Summary:

Being a doer aint easy.

~~~
dschobel
I was thinking of something along the lines of the Institute for Advanced
Study in Princeton but for computer scientists & entrepreneurs.

In short: Interesting things happen when you put smart people in a room
without any constraint and a little bit of funding.

Although I freely admit the IAS is fairly controversial and some people hate
the model.

------
hristov
And the perfect start-up founder is ....

[http://croutonboy.typepad.com/photos/people_i_hate/scrappy.j...](http://croutonboy.typepad.com/photos/people_i_hate/scrappy.jpg)

------
yef
Good observations, but the last two paragraphs fail to convince me. "Normal
people" span the gamut of solitary, advice-seeking, etc. I also wouldn't
describe the past as "slow and harmonious".

------
stumm
"I always worry the speakers will put us in an embarrassing position by
contradicting what we tell the startups, but it happens surprisingly rarely."

Why would someone with a different opinion be embarrassing?

~~~
pg
Because it would imply that we'd given people the wrong advice. The speakers
are generally pretty eminent. We'd look bad if we told people to do x and some
famous startup founder then told them not to.

~~~
blasdel
I think that any public exposition / debate following such a disagreement
would be _far_ more valuable to all present than anything either party could
convey as intentional advice.

------
tjmc
Made me smile, but I don't agree that "dignity is merely a sort of plaque".
That may be right if you're just talking about presentation/grooming, but
"dignity" (to me) includes self assurance, courage and perhaps a bit of
defiance. All good things to see in a founder I'd say.

------
ujjwalg
On a side note, can someone from YC post pictures of YC office? Just curious.
:)

~~~
jl
Our frontpage has some good photos.

~~~
ujjwalg
I am not a big fan of flash slide shows. They literally suck.

edit: One cannot control it. Move the slide show faster, slower, go back,
stop, etc., which makes it time consuming and inefficient.

~~~
stevoski
A vacuum cleaner literally sucks. I'm not sure how a flash slide show
literally sucks.

~~~
kirubakaran
This is how: <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literally> [see "Usage
note"]

~~~
smokinn
Seems to me that "Usage note" can be summed up as: Often people use it wrong.
This doesn't irritate most, but some people prefer the English language be
used correctly.

~~~
mmt
Language is usage is language.

Although I believe there to be no "correctly," I do believe that this is a
deplorable case of a word losing meaning, without a suitable replacement.

~~~
minsight
(I am so tempted to respond to this with a randomly generated list of words)

------
indiejade
_4\. How scrappy founders are. That was her actual word. I agree with her, but
till she mentioned this it never occurred to me how little this quality is
appreciated in most of the rest of the world. It wouldn't be a compliment in
most organizations to call someone scrappy._

Scrappy is getting by on the most minimal of necessities, does not ever
involve a company doing one's laundry, and from everything I've been able to
gather, requires actual bean counting.

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
Huh, I always thought of "scrappy" as a willingness to get into a fight,
despite the odds being against you.

~~~
gojomo
I think that's the traditional definition -- but its meaning is drifting,
because the word also makes people think of 'scrounging' or 'getting by on
scraps'. So it's not just a fighter, but one who fights on in a
resourceful/thrifty way.

Though PG cites the 'belligerent' meaning, I suspect Kate and others are
likely to mean/hear the 'thrifty/tenacious' connotations.

------
tsestrich
Very interesting to get a "third-party" perspective on things, having never
gotten to work out in that environment myself.

------
wwkeyboard
About point #1, does anyone have data on how many startups really fail? I have
found answers from 70-90% on google, but those numbers come from blog posts
and not from 100 times the number of failed businesses divided by the number
of successful businesses formed in some reasonable grouping of time and space.

~~~
replicatorblog
Along those lines I'm curious how many of the YC companies make it to a next
round of funding? Or make it to profitability and don't seek funding vs. those
that formally wind down. I went to a TechStars meetup and something like 10 of
16 from the inaugural class got funded, 4 didn't because they were profitable,
acquired, or otherwise all set, and 2 formally closed. Is that kind of data
available for YC?

~~~
pg
From the winter cycle of 16 startups, there are 3 that have neither raised
money nor are ramen profitable. Of those 3, 1 is already dead, because of
disputes between the founders. Another hasn't started trying to raise money
yet, because there's stuff they want to get built first. So only 1 of the 16
is currently trying to raise money.

~~~
systemtrigger
Apart from the usual seed money do you ever invest more in a startup, either
as YC or as an angel?

~~~
pg
YC doesn't, but I occasionally participate individually in angel rounds.

------
messel
Surprised Kate didn't mention that founders were not only scrappy, but a
little crazy. The combination of willpower, imagination, confidence, and the
ability to listen to users/customers is like dancing with a Tasmanian devil.
It always sets my neurons spinning when I try and grok an entrepreneurs
rationale.

------
sielskr
Paul Graham: I'd like to encourage you to write up any insight you may have
had not about startups. Your essay about high school (the one that compares
the assiduousness of high school students to Navy Seals) was one the most
helpful and insight-dense things I have ever read.

------
tyn
Number 4 was a surprise to me. And I'm not sure I really get the meaning of
"If you're not threatening, you're probably not doing anything new, and
dignity is merely a sort of plaque".

------
ngs
'Scrappy' is a great description. I also like the imagery 'Scrappy smart'
brings to mind.

------
DanielBMarkham
_By inverting this list, we can get a portrait of the "normal" world. It's
populated by people who talk a lot with one another as they work slowly but
harmoniously on conservative, expensive projects whose destinations are
decided in advance, and who carefully adjust their manner to reflect their
position in the hierarchy._

Don't stop there, Paul. This "inversion" idea still has a lot more mileage in
it. Just off the top of my head I'd add that the "normal" world is also full
of large teams, scheduled meetings, integrated hierarchical social
environments, and teams that never die.

------
albertcardona
I was thunderstruck by the following:

"By inverting this list, we can get a portrait of the 'normal' world. It's
populated by people who talk a lot with one another as they work slowly but
harmoniously on conservative, expensive projects whose destinations are
decided in advance, and who carefully adjust their manner to reflect their
position in the hierarchy."

And:

"Interestingly, while Kate said that she could never pick out successful
founders, she could recognize VCs, both by the way they dressed and the way
they carried themselves."

~~~
replicatorblog
I wonder if the issue of carriage has more to do with the Avg. age of founders
being ~25yrs. vs. VC's ~45yrs. Beyond the obvious appearance issues you tend
to develop more confidence, present better, etc. as you age. That said a
fundamental difference in the Funder vs. Founder personality makes sense as
well.

~~~
Gibbon
The average age of founders is not 25.. I suggest you revisit your
assumptions.

~~~
replicatorblog
Yes it is.. I suggest you check your facts.

From PG: <http://ycombinator.com/faq.html>

What's the average age of people you fund?

About 25. A lot of people think it's younger because the press especially like
to write about young founders.

~~~
ryanwaggoner
YCs founders are hardly representative of founders as a whole...not many
people over the age of 30 are willing or able to put themselves in a position
where they can start a company with $20k.

<http://www.kauffman.org/Details.aspx?id=1784>

~~~
replicatorblog
Of course, but this thread is in relation to the founders at YC and the VC's
who speak to them. There are a great many founders of all ages, but they
aren't the focus on this article.

------
torpor
WTF, is it normal practice for tech startups to hire their /architects/ to
help run the company? I mean, is this really such a great thing?

