Comment by the_watcher | Hacker News Reader

Comment by the_watcher | Hacker News Reader

The idea that entrepreneurship is somehow opposed to "liberalism" is just laughable. Startup communities welcome people no matter what their background (high school dropout, college dropout, who cares?). At least, that is their goal. This is not to say that there isn't some cognitive bias in favor of those with access to elite educations (I'd say much less so than in older institutions such as law, and even in modern institutions like banking and consulting). However, the barriers to entry in technology essentially do not exist in the way they do in banking and law (try getting one of those jobs without a degree). Or even becoming a politician. Just off the top of my head, Paul Buchheit started at Case Western Reserve. Jack Dorsey started at the Missouri Institute of Technology. The President of the company I work at went to USD. Evan Williams went to Nebraska. Biz Stone went to Northeastern, then UMass. Trevor Blackwell started at Carleton. Other YC partners went to schools like Bucknell and Stetson.

Apologies for the rant-like post, but this is becoming a major pet peeve of mine.

"entrepreneurship" inherently favours those who can take risks - which means those who are already financially secure, or from privileged backgrounds where they can be sure of finding a new job quickly. It favours those who can get money from VC, which is very much an old-boys club. And it favours the kind of businesses that make a profit quickly, whatever their other effects.

"living" inherently favours those who can breathe - which means those who are already breathing, or from oxygen rich environments where they can be sure of finding new O2 molecules quickly. It favours those who can get air from tanks, which are very much old apparatuses. And it favours the kind of lungs that exhale quickly, whatever their other effects.

I believe this is known as "reducto ad absurdum".

you're drawing a parallel of unequal magnitude.

I'm not so sure, historically maybe, but now? A nights and weekend gig could turn into something huge. YC was designed originally for college students on summer breaks (hardly financially secure and the majority who end up at college are from the vast middle of the financial spectrum).

Sure, there's a bias toward the educated but education is attainable from the library and now the internet. The other biases will still be there, but they are hardly disqualifying in the U.S. There is no rigid class system, for instance.

While entrepreneurship is absolutely easier for those with access to money and privilege, so is everything. Name one job where access to money and privilege doesn't convey some form of advantage. Also, law, banking, consulting, and most white collar jobs are infinitely more favorable towards those with such access, in that they essentially shut out those without it. Entrepreneurship does not. Even blue collar, union jobs favor those with seniority and access to resources. You've defined a characteristic of life, and only applied it as a negative when discussing startups.

Money and privilege make everything easier, but the effects are much larger in entrepreneurship. To my eyes it's easier for someone from a poor background to break into law or banking; the path isn't easy but it's defined - you get the grades, get the scholarships and so on, rather than having to persuade individuals to talk to you, to invest in your product. Likewise standardized hiring procedures like you see in large corporations or government are designed to detect or eliminate discrimination, whereas VC deals still often come down to a handshake over beers.

Of course other approaches have their own problems, I'm not saying every VC should start implementing a 20-page HR policy. But I think we should be conscious of who our methods are favouring.

Those who are already secure are unlikely to have the hustle and drive to create something innovative. The VC's may be out on the golf course but the people that actually make things are too busy.

>Startup communities welcome people no matter what their background

As long as they'll work long hours for low pay, dress right, binge drink, don't have a family, and somehow maintain an active interest in the open source community despite working 60hrs/week.

Just because a lot of "startup people" binge drink doesn't mean all of them do. Dress right? Startups have a much freer dress code (read: they don't) than basically all traditional jobs. Most jobs have actual dress codes.

Also, having a family doesn't mean they are excluded based on their background. It means they have decided to value something above starting a company, something they are free to do. You translated "welcome people of all backgrounds" into "allow people to get exactly the same lifestyle and compensation format while also working at a startup." Anyone can start a startup. That doesn't mean everyone should or will.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com