>It is certainly possible to do if you are blessed with the right combination of resources, connections and luck, but the whole "put up or shut up mentality" is merely an invocation of the just world fallacy as applied to startups.
Whats the fallacy for when you think you've identified a fallacy and simply assert it? Just because someone writes down the definition of a fallacy doesn't make it true. A dog has four legs and a tail, but its not a cat. Sorry, the fallacy thing is a pet peeve :P
Anyway, back the to topic. I do believe, you missed the central point and latched onto a tangential irrelevant point. The point is identifying the company culture, understanding peoples personalities, their motivations, and then figuring out a way to work together - even if you have an annoying boss, even if your coworkers are incompetent (as they often are), even if you think you know how to fix all problems - is WAY more important than doing something because you think youre hot shit who can prove people wrong.
>The 'worst' professional environment with the worst code base I worked in was run by a authoritarian, although tenacious idiot who lost money consistently for roughly ten years. Some of that was because of how badly he ran things.
>Were I blessed with millions in family money like he was I certainly would have "started my own company and made my own rules".
Okay, but that is not the only way people start companies. SV is its own bubble, when you can funnily enough, become a multimillionaire without turning a single dollar in profit. In the real world people put their savings/health/marriage/family life/ on the line and sacrifice a LOT to start a company.
>Whats the fallacy for when you think you've identified a fallacy and simply assert it?
Not this.
>Anyway, back the to topic. I do believe, you missed the central point and latched onto a tangential irrelevant point. The point is identifying the company culture, understanding peoples personalities, their motivations, and then figuring out a way to work together - even if you have an annoying boss, even if your coworkers are incompetent (as they often are), even if you think you know how to fix all problems - is WAY more important than doing something because you think youre hot shit who can prove people wrong.
There are a few people saying that. Nonetheless, I do believe that there are a number of people on this thread who are happy to use that as an excuse to say "shut the fuck up and kiss the ring" (e.g. the guy who said 'wait six months before proposing anything new'). That isn't healthy either, a and if you work with people like that the healthiest response is to leave and try and find somebody who isn't a jerk to work for.
>Okay, but that is not the only way people start companies.
I didn't say it was. Nonetheless, the most common unifying feature of entrepreneurs isn't a propensity to be trailblazers who take risks - it's access to spare cash, and, shockingly, not every employee of every company has capital just lying around.
If we're talking probabilities, the average entrepreneur is more like my boss than Mark Zuckerberg.
Bosses like to feel that their authority is deserved though, and it's easier to think that if you spread the myth that just "anybody" can start a company.
>e.g. the guy who said 'wait six months before proposing anything new'
>That isn't healthy either, a and if you work with people like that the healthiest response is to leave and try and find somebody who isn't a jerk to work for.
That is a weak point though. The alternative explanation to that is that they didn't actually mean what you think they meant.
It is very tedious to say "wait six months before proposing anything new - but be polite and ask questions, don't be a pushover, don't agree to unethical decisions, don't be a jerk, etc, etc" People often use shorthand to convey their strongest point.
>If we're talking probabilities, the average entrepreneur is more like my boss than Mark Zuckerberg.
If you're talking about finances - totally disagree on that one. There are FAR more small businesses funded by small loans or borrowing from your savings or family, and grinding it out, than being handed million dollar VC cookies. That's my own feeling based on businesses around me (I'm not in SV)
Whats the fallacy for when you think you've identified a fallacy and simply assert it? Just because someone writes down the definition of a fallacy doesn't make it true. A dog has four legs and a tail, but its not a cat. Sorry, the fallacy thing is a pet peeve :P
Anyway, back the to topic. I do believe, you missed the central point and latched onto a tangential irrelevant point. The point is identifying the company culture, understanding peoples personalities, their motivations, and then figuring out a way to work together - even if you have an annoying boss, even if your coworkers are incompetent (as they often are), even if you think you know how to fix all problems - is WAY more important than doing something because you think youre hot shit who can prove people wrong.
>The 'worst' professional environment with the worst code base I worked in was run by a authoritarian, although tenacious idiot who lost money consistently for roughly ten years. Some of that was because of how badly he ran things.
>Were I blessed with millions in family money like he was I certainly would have "started my own company and made my own rules".
Okay, but that is not the only way people start companies. SV is its own bubble, when you can funnily enough, become a multimillionaire without turning a single dollar in profit. In the real world people put their savings/health/marriage/family life/ on the line and sacrifice a LOT to start a company.