Hackers can be business guys, and other lessons from Paul Graham

I always thought this was PG's greatest gift to the tech world. To horribly generalize - prior to YC "business" people had a patronizing attitude toward developers. They were expensive assets - comparable to hw/sw and data-centers - that were required to successfully launch and grow a startup. But they weren't invited to the strategic table too often. They didn't get business.<p>I don't know this to be a fact but I always felt like PG responded with a "I'll show you!" after one too many patronizing comments from the old boys club of VC's or CEO's or SVP's of BD's. And show us he has. Certainly other factors (the lower entry cost to starting a startup) contributed to the rise of the wide spread geek business leader. But PG deserves a lot of credit.<p>Having said all that I almost feel like developers today are similar to women in the 80's (stick with me I know this is getting weird) Women in the 80's were supposed to have fulfilling careers and still be great mother's/spouses. They could have both! They just ended up with 2x the pressure to be great at what they did vs before. It seems today every developer is supposed to have a real side project that could blossom into it's own business at any point. Come to think of it; non technical startup folks are implored to "learn to code!" So maybe it applies to both devs and non devs in startups.<p>It's an interesting time. I think it's great developers can now lead companies with little or not stigma attached. In the long run though I believe in teams and specialization vs individuals and doing it all. I think we'll return to a more natural balance. And that tends to be that people who can build and nurture a forest tree by tree and row by row aren't the same people who can see the entire forest and what the seasons will bring. The forest does best when each person is in the right role.

Right. Business things, like hacking is mostly experience.<p>But much like hacking, I would argue, there are rockstar/ninja/superstar/10x/&#60;insert other (deprecated?) term here&#62; <i>business people</i> as well. A lot of it has to do with natural aptitude; just as how coding doesn't simply click for everyone, business things (which is mostly just dealing with people) simply doesn't either.

I don't know if anyone here is a fan of MMA aka Mixed Martial Arts (as I am), but I think the parallels between the startup/hacker world and MMA are fascinating.<p>Not unlike startups, success in MMA requires proficiency in several very different disciplines including wrestling, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, boxing, Thai boxing (Muay Thai), karate, etc.<p>In the early days of MMA, fighters were very one-dimensional and the dominant champions tended to be wrestlers, reason being that while a wrestler could reasonably defend against a (kick)boxer's strikes, (kick)boxers were generally powerless to do anything once a wrestler took them down, which they inevitably did in the course of a fight.<p>I believe this is the case with hackers vs. business guys as well. Hackers can generally become very proficient in business in 3~5 years on the job, but a business guy would need 10+ years of focused practice in order to become equally proficient in hacking, and until they learn will be absolutely clueless when working with hackers.<p>And in the early wrestler-dominated days of MMA, people envisioned a future where every MMA athlete would be equally well-rounded in all of the disciplines and such distinctions would become unnecessary. But as is often the case, the reality has turned out a bit differently.<p>A strong wrestling base is still a huge plus and a strong indicator of success - There are 8 weight classes in the UFC and 5 of them are wrestlers. But in general, what has happened is that in order to be a champion or championship contender, one needs to be minimally (i.e. above average) well-rounded in every discipline, but every champion is exceptional in at least one discipline. For example, non-wrestler champions like Anderson Silva (185 lbs) and Jose Aldo (145 lbs) are outstanding kickboxers who are competent enough in wrestling to be able to avoid being taken down. The days of only-specialists are gone and the days of only-generalists never came; the reality has turned out to be a combination of the two.<p>I expect to see the same dynamic in the startup world. Hackers are becoming more business-minded and business guys are (maybe less so) starting to realize the "power" and importance of hackers, but I don't expect the two worlds to ever completely converge. It will be important to be world-class in at least one discipline (hacking or marketing or whatever), but everyone will need to be at least above-average in all disciplines to expect to compete at all.

I am surprised that Shenglong is down voted - it strikes me that the idea of 10x "business-people" is just as valid as 10x developers. Certainly Branson for example seems better at it than, say, me.<p>@Andrew_quentin Want my take on the 5 or so business rules:<p>1. Budget. Don't spend more than you plan to, plan to make a profit.<p>2. Clarity. Be clear what you offer and why it benefits the target market<p>3. ABS - Always Be Selling. Build a pipeline of prospects and clients and audiences. Keep on telling them how your thing will make their lives better. Then and only then watch GlenGary GlenRoss<p>4. Service - the customer must think you love them because only people we love do we treat so well. This is easier with few customers. They then have to be charged more. This is a sub rule (6)<p>5. Consistency - say it, do it. Hire a PA to make sure you do.<p>6. Never drop your price or cut your rates

I would say smart hackers can be nearly anything they want to be. The best of them are capable of looking at most any problem and breaking it down into solvable chunks. Whether it's figuring out the behaviors necessary to tone their bodies into beings capable of physical activity, or honing their skills with machinery to rebuild an old car. Hackers can be some of the best mechanics and are capable of knowing how to turn their bodies into incredible machines.<p>Those are just a couple of examples of what hackers are capable of outside of, well, hacking on things. If there are parts of problems or tasks hackers don't know, they can research them and understand how to fix them. This means that they're not afraid to jump into the deep end in other professions or tasks.<p>Capable of being a business person, and possessing the same drive as business people are where the disconnect occurs, in my opinion. Could a good hacker figure out the steps needed to create something that would be considered a successful business? Yes, probably so. But, are smart hackers driven to generate wealth or create large organizations of people? In my experience, the answer is often: "not really, but I'd love to help you build it."

Since this was in 2005 I wonder what he'd say now? I believe he has since said that initially, they thought they were looking for smart people. Over time they found out they were looking for determined people.<p>[Business Writer] What do you look for in people?<p>[PG] Determination. When we started, we thought we were looking for smart people, but it turned out that intelligence was not as important as we expected. If you imagine someone with 100 percent determination and 100 percent intelligence, you can discard a lot of intelligence before they stop succeeding. But if you start discarding determination, you very quickly get an ineffectual and perpetual grad student."

"We fire up that video the second we start reading an application, usually."<p>As a new applicant, it makes me curious. Does that mean that (usually) if I haven't seen views on the video yet, the application hasn't been read yet?

I'm going to watch this entire video but what I find interesting in the first few minutes are Paul's facial reactions to the initial questions indicating what appears to be no idea at all of what he is going to be asked.<p>In contrast to the facial reactions of people who are asked questions on formal TV interviews who appear as if they more or less know what is going to be asked because there isn't as much facial twitching, or thinking, it's as if they've had time to think things through by knowing in advance the questions. Not the case here.

&#62; I'd be reluctant to invent in someone who made desktop software<p>I wonder if pg would revise that statement now seeing as how Dropbox is its largest winner so far.

This interview contains some pretty amazing gems. This part[1]:<p><i>So, really good sofware is software that embodies an idea, some fabulous idea for some new thing that is possible that maybe only the guy writting the software realizes is possible. And maybe people who hear about it while he's working at it think it is the stupidiest idea</i><p>... reminded me of Peter Thiel's famous quesetion[2]:<p><i>what important truth do very few people agree with you on?</i><p>[1] <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&#38;v=BDA0t49AaZ4#t=133s" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&#38;v=B...</a><p>[2] <a href="http://blakemasters.com/post/22866240816/peter-thiels-cs183-startup-class-11-notes-essay" rel="nofollow">http://blakemasters.com/post/22866240816/peter-thiels-cs183-...</a>

Even though it's true that "web based" software will be the future I personally think it's a bit sad(unless if that term doesn't solely mean software on a server that you connect with a bloated browser to).<p>Besides that, interesting and good interview.

Right, what are these rules?

Yes. And many top notch business guys can become great programmers if they want to. Hard working people can shine anywhere.

As an aspiring business guy, my biggest problem seems to be accessing information about different models.<p>Say I want to build a web community around a particular kind of video game. Estimating the value of that market is pretty damn opaque to an outsider.

What PG says resonate so much with me, it's hard to explain. People asking me questions about my startups or hacking stuff... I wish I could just redirect them to this video. Actually, I will!<p>On a side note, I didn't know PG sounded a bit british : )

ob·strep·er·ous /əbˈstrepərəs/<p>Adjective Noisy and difficult to control: "the boy is cocky and obstreperous".