We have seen this movie before

chestergrant.posterous.com

39 points·chegra84··6 comments

The formatting choices were jarring, though I wholeheartedly agree with the large bolded words in the last paragraph.

Good stuff. Agree as well.

>I will pay you $10 for everyday I don't come to the gym and get on that bike for at least 25 minutes.

Not to nitpick, but I think that "dont" shouldnt be in that sentence? The way it's worded incentivizes the trainer to make sure I don't show up. Without the "dont" it sort of encourages me to not show up because it costs an extra $10, but at the same time the other guy is going to be encouraged to get me to show up. Or maybe the analogy just doesn't work. I get your point entirely though.

I liked the article.

You are correct that the trainer is incentivized such that he would prefer I not show up. But /I/ am incentivized /to/ show up.

I think the problem with this argument is that our observations are pre-selected before see them. This biases our predictions towards spectacular success/failure stories and exaggerated anecdotes. What would have happened if you were Facebook and thought, "we know social networking startups end in failure, and so we should try something else".

I'm not sure Facebook thought that in 2004. Besides, it's all relative. Some people reading this will think, "Gym? Bring it on!!" Obviously, a successful path would somehow diverge from previous failures.

Also, I think the article is more about addiction to HN and not so much startup advice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com