I've Changed My Mind
whattofix.com
whattofix.com
Sure, yes, there may be a programmer deficit in the woods, but there's no programmer deficit around here. I work with people all over the country via phone, email, and internet.
To be honest with you, I would work with you, whether you were in the woods or not, if I trusted you. I don't trust you because I feel like you blame things for your problems without really trying to figure out how to overcome them. I read a lot of the stuff you write and it feels very angry to me.
Sometimes I agree with what you say and sometimes I don't. That's not the point. I work with a lot of people I disagree with all the time, but it feels to me like there is something missing in your awareness of reality. There's a gap there. I'm not sure where it comes from. Most people I work with, everyone I work with, myself included have these gaps. The problem with you is that you are hiding yours, even from yourself. You portray an image, here and on your blog of great understanding, but I don't know if that's true, because you seem to lack an understanding of free will and internal motivation.
You're picking it up a little better in this post. You own your ideas. You are responsible for their execution. In the past, it was almost as if you wanted to convince everyone that you are great and therefore your idea must be great and therefore, it's difficult for you to understand why no one would want to work with you. But what are you working on? Where is your work? That bit seems to be missing.
Anyway, I sense some pain in you. Some frustration. Some loneliness. That's not everyone else's fault though. There's a reason you choose to live in the woods. Right?
I often feel like I should be writing more about what I'm learning from my startup. Then I remember how embarrassing most of these lessons are and decide to save those stories for a day when they can do me good. Sometimes perhaps it's better for people to not hear from you for a while if you've got nothing good to report.
Google wasn't the first search engine but they are the best. Microsoft didn't build the first operating system based on 'windows' but they did it the best (execution). Firefox wasn't the first browser but it is much better than IE. The iPod was very late to the handheld MP3 player market, but they are the best.
It is ALL about execution and unless it is a patentable idea then why not share? You might be more compelled to execute faster if others are doing it and you might learn from how not to bring it to market from other failures.
Ideas really are worth nothing. They are handed out to multiple people across the world. First to market is great on occasion but usually second or third to market become the mainstream choice.
In game development it is the same thing. People think they have the best idea ever and never share it. But in actuality the idea is not new as there is nothing new under the sun. It is just another configuration of some past idea in a new form.
Everyone else also has ideas they want to work on. Rarely will they drop it and start pursuing your idea.
Here is a great article on this same behavior in game development: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DavidRosen/20091027/3399/The_...
Also maybe this will provide a little motivation, don't let that idea turn into 'brain crack': http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/07/071106.html
I know the feeling. Without any idea what it is you're working on, I know the best advice I can offer: keep at it. Here's a comment I wrote awhile ago with a similar sentiment:
Of course, I haven't been burned in a major way before...
I still think ideas are very important. A previous poster lists Google as an example of the fact that being first doesn't matter, execution does. Google was first and foremost a new idea (pagerank). And they also executed. And then they got lucky (adwords). But without the idea, they would not have beaten the #1 search engine of the times.
I'm hoping to do it in 4 stages, each taking about 2-4 weeks. I'm hoping that I can demo each stage here without giving the game away.
Now I just need runway. Great Pumpkin above please give me runway.
If you are seriously going to go through with this, there is absolutely no point in inviting others to the table.
Professional football teams don't lend their playbook to their opponent before the game just so they know what's about to hit them. That's just foolish.
In itself, duplication and spread of ideas is firmly defensible on Kantian grounds as the moral action. And surely in principle, freedom of non-rivalrous goods is desirable economically too. There is the claim of monopoly protection being an encouragement to production, yet the evidence for it is practically non-existent.
While we are probably all prone to an impulse of self-interest such as described in the blog-post, it does not seem the rational choice.
Marc Andreeson argues that a good market is the most important thing. Good market + bad team = okay. Bad market + good team = team pivots to something new. Good market + good team = something magic. http://pmarca-archive.posterous.com/the-pmarca-guide-to-star...
i don't know the answer to that, but i live as though it's the latter. we each of us set the example for everyone else and fulfill our own prophesies.