undefined | Better HN

0 pointsyowlingcat2y ago0 comments

If anything, I view that as a slight deficiency and bias of the essay's sense. Here's how I'd phrase it based on what's worked for me, which is "Learn to fall in love with expensive, poorly-solved problems." Not all expensive poorly-solved problems are poorly-solved, but for the ones that are, focusing your curiosity on them -- why they are expensive, why they are poorly-solved, what state of the art looks like, how it could be improved -- that is a surefire way, in my view, towards doing great work.

Now, that may not be considered great work by the essay. But I might read the essay with my assumption around its editorialization -- which is that it's to some degree an attempt to describe "here's what I'd like to invest in." I'll bet you today (and especially in the future) that if I tested the author's revealed preference about investing in "my" thesis of great work, while our stated preferences might differ, our revealed preferences would align.

Caveat that this is this is all conjecture given that I've never directly interacted with YC's investment thesis.

0 comments

sanderjd2y ago

Yeah we're sort of just debating the implied definition of something left purposefully vague, but I don't read this particular essay as an investment thesis thing at all. His motivating examples are pretty much all musicians and theoreticians there's no investing in those things. To some extent those examples are metaphorical of course, and I'm certain he is thinking of at least some entrepreneurs as having done "great work". But I still take the essay more at face value that it isn't primarily focused on the kind of wildly lucrative "great work" that makes a good investment.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

sanderjd2y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse