Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by AndrewKemendo | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

AndrewKemendo

Perfectly encapsulated in this tweet:

18: Go to Harvard or Stanford for CS.

22: Work at FAANG companies.

25: Quit and raise millions for your startup.

26: Sell your company to a FAANG company/IPO

28: Join a VC firm, invest in people like you, and make predictions on Twitter all day.

https://twitter.com/TheLexTimes/status/1105131411411886081

View on HN

I think this has become outdated. From my experience FAANGs are largely filled with people who are risk-adverse, which is why it makes sense to me that the next gen of startups will come from alumni of successful unicorns given the risk-seeking attitude you had to have in the first place to join one of those cos earlier on.

I mean how many ex—Amazon founders do you see? Probably not at all in proportion to the number of alumni relative to all VC funded cos.

>I mean how many ex—Amazon founders do you see? Probably not at all in proportion to the number of alumni relative to all VC funded cos.

Is there a reason to single out Amazon specifically? Because I’ve heard of lots of Xoogler founders and exFB founders.

Amazon isn't a unicorn in the sense of people placing extremely high expectations on it and pumping it full of money. Instead they're simply re-investing the money they make. At an impressive rate, but steadily and with not so much risk if they mess up a new venture.

I understand this is off topic but does Netflix ever actually acquire startups?

They are a very different company to Facebook, Apple, Amazon or Google, I feel like they are bundled in mainly to make a cooler acronym.

Or just a less offensive acronym.

How about AFGA, then.

Call them AGFA and we can buy film from them.

How is it offensive?

I don’t get why Microsoft isn’t one of the letters. I get that it needs to be easy to say but still.

How about FAMANG?

French media uses GAFAM and their wiki on it is hilarious [0].

[0]: https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAFAM

Because the acronym comes from stock markets, when FAANG were hot tech stocks. Microsoft already was old and boring at that point, so didn't count.

Old maybe, but not boring. Their tech stack is still the best there is.

I'm sure many would call it crusty.

You and I have heard different things but I suppose those who don’t like it are more likely to leave and then tell me horror stories.

Isn't Apple about as old as Microsoft? Or is it "Amazon & Airbnb"?

"hot" doesn't necessarily mean new: Amazon also wasn't new on the stock markets, but it was on a clear upwards trend, as was Apple. Apple had iPhones/iPads, entirely new worlds, Microsoft had ... yet another Windows?

That was possible only when working at FAANG was very impressive. Hasn’t been true since 2005.

I don't get it. Should highly capable people not pursue a lucrative career path?

People can do whatever they want, but if they're truly "highly capable" maybe they should try something a little more challenging than following the herd?

I hold no ill will against all of these people getting rich this way. Let's just not pretend like they're innovators, though.

I still don't get it. Are the CS programs at Stanford and Harvard not challenging enough? Are Google and Facebook not demanding places to work?

They aren’t compared with your own startup.

I think the tweet is implying that 99% of the "leaders" and "brilliant successes" in our "creative, innovative, disruptive" industry are in fact a coterie of not-very-remarkable, yet very-privileged, 30-somethings whose achievements rest on a combination of luck and having made the most soulless and conformist career decisions available.

When "success" means having your product shut down and getting yourself acquihired, we as an industry need to find a better definition of success.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com