Paul Graham advises aspiring startup founders to relentlessly pursue their own curiosity. He argues that the most successful startups are built by founders deeply passionate about solving a problem they personally experience. Instead of chasing trends or abstract notions of good ideas, Graham encourages builders to work on what truly interests them, even if it seems niche or insignificant. This genuine interest will fuel the sustained effort required to overcome the inevitable challenges of building a company. By focusing on their own curiosity and building something they themselves want, founders are more likely to create something truly valuable and novel.
Garry Tan celebrates Y Combinator's 20th birthday, reflecting on its evolution from a summer program offering $11,000 and ramen to a global institution supporting thousands of founders. He emphasizes YC's consistent mission of helping ambitious builders create the future and expresses gratitude to the founders, alumni, partners, and staff who have contributed to its success over two decades. Tan also looks forward to the future, highlighting YC's continued commitment to supporting founders at all stages, from idea to IPO.
The Hacker News comments on the "Happy 20th Birthday, Y Combinator" post largely express congratulations and fond memories of YC's earlier days. Several commenters reminisce about the smaller, more intimate nature of early batches and the evolution of the program over time. Some discuss the impact YC has had on the startup ecosystem, attributing its success to its simple yet effective model. A few express skepticism about the long-term sustainability of the accelerator model or criticize YC's shift towards larger, later-stage companies. There's also a thread discussing the origins of the "Y Combinator" name, referencing its mathematical and functional programming roots. Overall, the sentiment is positive and celebratory, reflecting on YC's significant influence on the tech world.
Paul Graham argues that the primary way people get rich now is by creating wealth, specifically through starting or joining early-stage startups. This contrasts with older models of wealth acquisition like inheritance or rent-seeking. Building a successful company, particularly in technology, allows founders and early employees to own equity that appreciates significantly as the company grows. This wealth creation is driven by building things people want, leveraging technology for scale, and operating within a relatively open market where new companies can compete with established ones. This model is distinct from merely getting a high-paying job, which provides a good income but rarely leads to substantial wealth creation in the same way equity ownership can.
Hacker News users discussed Paul Graham's essay on contemporary wealth creation, largely agreeing with his premise that starting a startup is the most likely path to significant riches. Some commenters pointed out nuances, like the importance of equity versus salary, and the role of luck and timing. Several highlighted the increasing difficulty of bootstrapping due to the prevalence of venture capital, while others debated the societal implications of wealth concentration through startups. A few challenged Graham's focus on tech, suggesting alternative routes like real estate or skilled trades, albeit with potentially lower ceilings. The thread also explored the tension between pursuing wealth and other life goals, with some arguing that focusing solely on riches can be counterproductive.
The author recounts a brief, somewhat awkward encounter with Paul Graham at a coffee shop. They nervously approached Graham, introduced themselves as a fan of Hacker News, and mentioned their own startup idea. Graham responded politely but curtly, asking about the idea. After a mumbled explanation, Graham offered a generic piece of advice about focusing on users, then disengaged to rejoin his companions. The author was left feeling slightly deflated, realizing their pitch was underdeveloped and the interaction ultimately uneventful, despite the initial excitement of meeting a revered figure.
HN commenters largely appreciated the author's simple, unpretentious anecdote about meeting Paul Graham. Several noted the positive, down-to-earth impression Graham made, reinforcing his public persona. Some discussed Graham's influence and impact on the startup world, with one commenter sharing a similar experience of a brief but memorable interaction. A few comments questioned the significance of such a short encounter, while others found it relatable and heartwarming. The overall sentiment leaned towards finding the story charming and a pleasant reminder of the human side of even highly successful figures.
Paul Graham's 2009 post argues that Twitter's significance stems not from its seeming triviality, but from its unique blend of messaging and public broadcast. It's a new kind of medium, distinct from email or IM, offering a low-friction way to share thoughts and information publicly. This public nature fosters a sense of ambient awareness, keeping users connected to a wider circle than traditional communication methods. Its brevity and immediacy contribute to a feeling of being "present," allowing participation in real-time events and fostering a sense of shared experience. While seemingly inconsequential updates create this presence, they also pave the way for sharing genuinely valuable information within the established network.
HN commenters discuss Paul Graham's 2009 essay on Twitter's significance. Several highlight the prescience of his observations about its future potential, particularly regarding real-time news and conversation. Some contrast Twitter's early simplicity with its current complexity, lamenting feature bloat and the rise of performative posting. Others note how Graham correctly predicted the platform's role as a powerful distribution channel, even envisioning its use for customer support. A few express skepticism about its long-term value, echoing early criticisms about the triviality of its content. Overall, the comments reflect a mix of admiration for Graham's foresight and a wistful look back at a simpler era of social media.
Summary of Comments ( 67 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43514969
HN users largely agree with Paul Graham's advice to focus on what truly compels you and to avoid prestigious but ultimately unsatisfying paths. Several commenters shared personal anecdotes of choosing passion projects over seemingly "better" opportunities, ultimately leading to greater fulfillment. Some highlighted the difficulty in identifying what truly interests you, suggesting exploration and experimentation as key. A few cautioned against blindly following passion without considering practicalities like financial stability, advocating for a balance between pursuing interests and ensuring a sustainable livelihood. The idea of "keeping your horizons narrow" to focus deeply resonated with many, although some interpreted this as focusing on a specific problem within a broader field rather than limiting oneself entirely. Finally, some users discussed the role of luck and privilege in being able to pursue unconventional paths.
The Hacker News post titled "What to Do," linking to Paul Graham's essay of the same name, has generated a fair number of comments discussing various aspects of the essay and its implications.
Several commenters delve into the idea of identifying what you truly enjoy doing, acknowledging the complexities and challenges involved. One commenter highlights the difficulty in discerning between genuine enjoyment and societal pressures or the pursuit of status. They point out that many activities might initially seem enjoyable due to external validation, but the underlying motivation might not be genuine passion. Another echoes this sentiment, adding that the search for what one wants to do can often be a distraction from simply doing things and discovering through action. The importance of experimentation and trying new things is emphasized, suggesting that passion isn't always found, but sometimes developed through experience.
Another thread of discussion centers around the financial realities and pressures that can influence career choices. Commenters acknowledge the privilege inherent in Graham's advice, recognizing that not everyone has the luxury of pursuing passion projects without considering financial stability. One commenter argues that focusing solely on what one loves can lead to a precarious financial situation, making it difficult to later pursue opportunities even within the field of interest. The discussion also touches on the practicality of identifying marketable skills and balancing passion with financial viability.
A few comments focus on the essay's target audience. Some believe Graham's advice is primarily aimed at young people or those early in their careers, suggesting that the flexibility and freedom to experiment are more readily available at those stages. Others discuss the challenges of applying this advice in different life circumstances, such as those with families or existing career commitments.
Some commenters offer more critical perspectives on Graham's essay. One points out the potential for self-deception when attempting to identify one's true calling, suggesting that people may rationalize their choices based on existing skills or perceived advantages. Another highlights the importance of understanding the market demand for chosen skills, warning against pursuing niche passions with limited career prospects. One commenter even suggests that the pursuit of "doing what you love" can sometimes be a form of procrastination, delaying necessary but less enjoyable tasks.
Finally, several commenters share personal anecdotes and experiences related to the topic. Some recount their journeys of discovering their passions, while others share stories of career changes and the challenges involved in pursuing non-traditional paths. These personal stories provide concrete examples and add a layer of practical insight to the broader discussion.