Hacker News Reader

Comment by jpdoctor | Hacker News Reader

> I don't think that's true.

Then I'm gonna bet that you never worked at Bell Labs.

> I think doing great work in the major problems in your field of choice are the exact heights that entrepreneurialism should strive for.

The time scale is vastly different. Entrepreneurs are not interested in starting programs that will yield results only after 10-20 years, and VCs have an even shorter attention span. Hell, funding events (which require showing progress) every two years are considered successful in the startup culture.

View on HN

> Entrepreneurs are not interested in starting programs that will yield results only after 10-20 years

What about the SpaceX's of the world? Founded in 2002; docked with the ISS in 2012.

> What about the SpaceX's of the world?

The folks Hamming mentioned did things and discovered things that had never been done before.

SpaceX docking with the ISS? You know that has already been proven out; so not exactly fertile new ground to win a Nobel Prize with.

I doubt that docking with the ISS is the end-goal of SpaceX. Musk talks about missions to Mars, and even helping to establish a human presence there. The latter certainly hasn't been done before.

My point was that, even at the 10-year mark, SpaceX is still working towards its goal -- a goal that may very well not yield its results until after the 20-year mark.

While I appreciate that Musk stands out partly as an exception to the rule, I think it's nevertheless reasonable to concede that not all entrepreneurs are focussed on 2-year goals.

You're conflating all entrepeneurs with a very specific subset you're probably more familiar with.

> You're conflating all entrepeneurs with a very specific subset you're probably more familiar with.

Great! The string of Nobel Prizes from entrepreneurs will be a breath of fresh air. Do you think it will happen first in Physics, Chemistry or Medicine?

Hamming's essay isn't about winning Nobel prizes.

Hamming's essay isn't about inventing something no-one's come up with before.

Hamming's essay is about doing great work, solving important problems, and having significance.

He provides explicit definitions for what those things are in the essay, as I did in my response. As such, none of your flippant retorts make sense within the context of either the essay or my initial response to you.

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

> Hamming's essay isn't about inventing something no-one's come up with before.

Really? I wonder why the title is "You and your research"? You think he is talking about inventing things that someone has come up with before?

Let's look at wiki for research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research

Research and experimental development is formal work undertaken systematically to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of humanity, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications

> Hamming's essay is about doing great work, solving important problems, and having significance.

No, that is your essay.

Hamming makes clear his remarks are about how to do "significant things," and he is using science as a microcosm to describe what that is, only because it is the microcosm he is most familiar with. See here:

"Why shouldn't you do significant things in this one life, however you define significant? I'm not going to define it - you know what I mean. I will talk mainly about science because that is what I have studied. But so far as I know, and I've been told by others, much of what I say applies to many fields. Outstanding work is characterized very much the same way in most fields, but I will confine myself to science."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1zDuOPkMSw

> Intro: I have given a talk with this title many times, and it turns out from discussions after the talk I could have just as well have called it "You and Your Engineering Career," or even "You and Your Career." But I left the word "Research" in the title because that is what I have most studied"

You said

> Entrepreneurs are not interested in starting programs that will yield results only after 10-20 years, and VCs have an even shorter attention span

I was responding to that (especially the assumption that entrepreneurs imply VC), not purely speculative bullshit about Nobel prize winners. At least keep track of your own arguments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com