I honestly do not gain anything from articles like this. They are so abstract that when it comes down to an actual actionable information - it doesn't apply anymore. It is sort of like reading one of those fluffy "How to become a millionaire" advice books. Nothing of substance comes out of it and they do not work for me.<p>I recently watched Sam Altman's MIT lecture [1] on Youtube about startup advice for hard tech companies. It was such a waste of time.<p>Instead, I find it much more informative and educational to read and watch stories about how a specific company was formed. Each story is unique and the just goes to show that each startup has unique challenges. There is so much to learn from these stories and their mistakes. For example, watch the SolidWorks founder presenting at Harvard about their initial marketing/pricing phase [2]. It is absolutely fascinating.<p>Reading generalized abstract fluff bothers me.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7HyWFJMAxg" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7HyWFJMAxg</a>
[2] <a href="https://youtu.be/t-EaWM8miHw" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/t-EaWM8miHw</a>
Altman’s on point here: don’t follow a trend, focus on solving problems. And choose something hard. When money is growing on trees, pick a major problem with a huge upside should you solve it. Startups are hard; at least make it have a chance of being really worthwhile.<p>— Someone who picked a small problem.
I always feel bad when I see startups come from a rich guy chasing fame or increasing the family wealth, they have a great and vital tool (money) but not a problem to solve nor an edge in the industry they are attacking. Kind of ironic, but hey throwing money to random ideas at least generates jobs and moves the economy.
A lot of sama hate in this thread for some reason, but the criticisms just come off as petty.<p>It's a less than 1000 word article giving a 30,000 ft ariel overview of making a startup. Not sure what people expected. If you have 10 years experience in graphic design, you are probably not going to find much of interest in a 1000 word article titled "Getting started in graphic design." Deal with it.<p>And everyone seems very glib to point out that his startup "failed," but I am not sure how that is relevant here. He's the president of Y Combinator and last time I checked they are doing fine. In art and science, some of the most accomplished figures are lousy teachers and vice versa. Any reason why this would be different in business?
Broadly disagree with ALL the points, except for the first one.<p>IMO this happens with a LOT of standard advice regarding startups. The problem is that there are as many ways to do a startup as there are founders and its too tempting for VC's to infer 'wisdom' from their immediate samples.<p>I suspect that this happens because as an observer its extremely hard to distinguish causation from correlation. Also, it seems that VC's tend to view 'emergent' success in terms of their own work ethics.<p>Sam's not the only one though. Paul Graham did this too with his two founder rule for startups.
50 likes and 2 comments over an hour seems like too little engagement to be second on the list. Are posts about Sam effectively sticked on HN? Is there any more information on how the front page works?
Something doesn't quite sit right with me about #5 "Think Bigger" and the example that a recruit might think "So what? Your company is just another enterprise software startup."<p>To me there are a lot of interesting opportunities in solving problems, that might initially seem mundane or tedious but could turn into successful, profitable businesses. #5 seems to sort of go against some of the sentiment in PG's article Shelp Blindness ( <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/schlep.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/schlep.html</a> ).<p>I suppose I might attempt to re-state #5 thusly: "The difficult and seemingly tedious work done in the early stages might show a path to providing solutions larger problems 1..n"<p>I'd like to be able to recruit people who are interested in a that journey more so than the end-state.
Distractions are everywhere, and one of the most insidious things in startups. Once you become a founder there is lots of "fun" stuff to do: go to conferences, have coffee meetings with important people, etc.<p>The discipline is to be able to say "No". To be honest it is still a skill I feel I haven't mastered yet, 7+ companies later :)<p>I recommend reading Essentialism, by Greg McKeown.
slightly offtopic, but startup related:<p>why Sam Altman would post on atrium.co website?<p>when checking their services, they provide incorporating and other legal services,<p>is it more custom legal service than clerky.com? any idea about pricing?<p>I'm looking to incorporate but slightly more complex than clerky standard templates
I keep seeing Sam Altman tied to clickbaity 'How-to' articles, but never managed to apply any of the lessons to start and grow a <i>successful</i> company himself. Obviously from his position now, he has a lot of insights into what other companies do, so It'd be great to see factual data from his insights, rather than top-down advice that he wasn't able to apply to his own career.