Mastering the art of saying "no" as a product manager is crucial for focusing on impactful work and avoiding feature creep. It involves strategically prioritizing tasks, aligning with overall product vision, and gracefully declining requests that don't contribute to that vision. This requires clear communication, explaining the rationale behind decisions, and offering alternative solutions when possible. Ultimately, saying "no" effectively allows product managers to protect their roadmap, manage stakeholder expectations, and deliver a more valuable product.
The blog post "Kelly Can't Fail" argues against the common misconception that the Kelly criterion is dangerous due to its potential for large drawdowns. It demonstrates that, under specific idealized conditions (including continuous trading and accurate knowledge of the true probability distribution), the Kelly strategy cannot go bankrupt, even when facing adverse short-term outcomes. This "can't fail" property stems from Kelly's logarithmic growth nature, which ensures eventual recovery from any finite loss. While acknowledging that real-world scenarios deviate from these ideal conditions, the post emphasizes the theoretical robustness of Kelly betting as a foundation for understanding and applying leveraged betting strategies. It concludes that the perceived risk of Kelly is often due to misapplication or misunderstanding, rather than an inherent flaw in the criterion itself.
The Hacker News comments discuss the limitations and practical challenges of applying the Kelly criterion. Several commenters point out that the Kelly criterion assumes perfect knowledge of the probability distribution of outcomes, which is rarely the case in real-world scenarios. Others emphasize the difficulty of estimating the "edge" accurately, and how even small errors can lead to substantial drawdowns. The emotional toll of large swings, even if theoretically optimal, is also discussed, with some suggesting fractional Kelly strategies as a more palatable approach. Finally, the computational complexity of Kelly for portfolios of correlated assets is brought up, making its implementation challenging beyond simple examples. A few commenters defend Kelly, arguing that its supposed failures often stem from misapplication or overlooking its long-term nature.
The "World Grid" concept proposes a globally interconnected network for resource sharing, focusing on energy, logistics, and data. This interconnectedness would foster greater cooperation and resource optimization across geopolitical boundaries, enabling nations to collaborate on solutions for climate change, resource scarcity, and economic development. By pooling resources and expertise, the World Grid aims to increase efficiency and resilience while addressing global challenges more effectively than isolated national efforts. This framework challenges traditional geopolitical divisions, suggesting a more integrated and collaborative future.
Hacker News users generally reacted to "The World Grid" proposal with skepticism. Several commenters questioned the political and logistical feasibility of such a massive undertaking, citing issues like land rights, international cooperation, and maintenance across diverse geopolitical landscapes. Others pointed to the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources and the challenges of long-distance transmission, suggesting that distributed generation and storage might be more practical. Some argued that the focus should be on reducing energy consumption rather than building massive new infrastructure. A few commenters expressed interest in the concept but acknowledged the immense hurdles involved in its realization. Several users also debated the economic incentives and potential benefits of such a grid, with some highlighting the possibility of arbitrage and others questioning the overall cost-effectiveness.
Summary of Comments ( 34 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42771310
HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise of strategically saying "no" as a product manager. Several share personal anecdotes reinforcing the importance of protecting engineering resources and focusing on core value propositions. Some discuss the nuances of saying "no," emphasizing the need to explain the reasoning clearly and offer alternative solutions where possible. A few commenters caution against overusing "no," highlighting the importance of maintaining positive relationships and remaining open to new ideas. The most compelling comments focus on the strategic framing of "no" as a tool for prioritization and resource allocation, not simply rejection. They emphasize using data and clear communication to justify decisions and build consensus. One commenter aptly summarizes this as "saying 'no' to the idea, but 'yes' to the person."
The Hacker News post "Master the Art of the Product Manager 'No'" with the ID 42771310 generated a moderate amount of discussion with a mix of perspectives on the article's topic of saying no as a product manager.
Several commenters agreed with the core premise of the article, emphasizing the importance of a product manager's ability to prioritize and push back against feature requests. One commenter highlighted the difficulty of saying no, particularly to powerful stakeholders, while another pointed out that effectively saying no is crucial for avoiding feature creep and maintaining a focused product roadmap. The "sandwich method" of delivering negative feedback—starting with positive reinforcement, then delivering the negative news, and concluding with more positive reinforcement—was also mentioned as a useful technique.
Some commenters delved into the nuances of saying no, suggesting that it's not always about outright rejection but rather about strategic deferral. One commenter suggested categorizing requests and communicating the rationale behind prioritization decisions, transforming a "no" into a "not now." Another highlighted the importance of understanding the underlying need behind a request, as this can open up opportunities for alternative solutions that address the user's problem more effectively than the initially proposed feature. This approach allows the product manager to collaborate with stakeholders and find creative solutions while still maintaining control over the product roadmap.
A few commenters offered different perspectives. One argued that constantly saying "no" can be detrimental to a product manager's relationships with stakeholders, advocating for a more collaborative approach that involves seeking compromise and finding win-win solutions. This commenter stressed the importance of building trust and maintaining positive working relationships. Another comment focused on the importance of data-driven decision making, emphasizing that saying "no" should always be backed by solid evidence and reasoning.
While generally agreeing with the article's message, some commenters expressed concerns about its tone and potential misinterpretations. They felt the article could be perceived as promoting a confrontational approach and suggested that framing "no" as a collaborative decision is more effective.
In summary, the comments section largely affirmed the importance of saying no as a product manager but also emphasized the need for nuance, strategic communication, and a collaborative approach to maintain positive relationships with stakeholders and build a successful product.