VivaTechnics

- With the advent of LLMs, sites like StackOverflow are effectively obsolete—robots.txt or not.

- It’s the inevitable consequence when companies cease to innovate.

This table loosely maps programming languages to human languages based on personality. C is the Latin of code—ancient and foundational. Python is the smooth, approachable Spanish. Rust channels French with elegance and strictness, while C++ is the global English: powerful but complex. Perl speaks Yiddish—quirky and expressive—while Bash grunts like Russian. From Swift’s sleek Italian to Assembly’s sacred Sanskrit, each pairing captures the essence of how these languages feel. A fun cultural lens on the world of code.

He argues:

There must be an underlying deterministic system. - We don’t know what it is yet. - Quantum mechanics is incomplete, not wrong — it hides deeper rules. - His belief is based on logic, not current experimental proof.

In short, he says we don’t know what it is, but it’s something out there.

You’ve clearly been through the wringer and picked up real experience. So why not grab two others like yourself and build something of your own? Pick any industry. Eventually, you’ll hit a similar wall. Everyone does. That’s the moment that sorts people. Most quit. Very very few push through. Those with passion, as you claim ("love").

Honestly, I’m one of those brain-dead folks, trying to jam AI into everything. Not because it’s always smart, but because I don't have a choice. We pitch anything without AI, and no one even listens. No budget, no job—simple as that.

It’s a social epidemic. People look at each other. We all keep pushing things too far in one direction, even when it makes no sense. There are many ways to do some other things. (I'm reminding myself here, not you).

Bottom line: pick yourself up, find your crew, and start building. Then, lead like a brain-alive exec.

- Remote roles can somehow work for certain personality types or professions—such as scientists, writers, or artists—who thrive in solitude, prefer to think deeply, need clarity, or simply don’t enjoy crowds.

- However, remote work is generally not ideal for business, ops or engineering roles, where being close to the core problems—and the people solving them—is often essential. It's also not recommended for those who dislike being home all day.

- In a remote setup, you either need to already know what you’re doing or be fully prepared to manage yourself. We don’t know you personally and can’t offer much direct help. But based on your post, it sounds like you’re capable of figuring it out. This isn’t rocket science—just be direct with your team, ask the same questions you’ve raised here, and don’t hesitate to request support when needed. Of course, like everyone already said, communicate and communicate.

- Keep in mind that remote roles can become problematic if you have family, kids, or pets who are going to interrupt you every 30 minutes—there’s often little you can do to control those distractions.

Thanks! But you forgot about me (in the bottom 1%). My net worth is well below -$94.52K, which seems to be the floor of the bottom 1%.

I’ve been pushing it lower — just trying to find out how deep it could go! :)

That model may work in the earliest days of a startup — but it usually breaks down as the company grows. Here’s why:

- Focus matters. Engineers need deep focus to build and scale. At the same time, finance/accounting and sales require their own level of expertise and dedicated attention. You can’t just “dabble” in those areas and expect excellence — especially when it comes to things like serious fundraising, investor relations, closing multi-million dollars contracts, financial compliance, etc.

- Scaling with only engineers creates organizational fragility. As headcount grows, managing a company full of only one type of thinker becomes a liability. It lacks diversity of thought, skills, and experience. Think of it like trying to build a tower using only one material — it may stand for a while, but it won’t last.

- Burnout and inefficiency. Expecting engineers to wear too many hats leads to mental overload and a lack of accountability. Critical tasks fall through the cracks, and product quality can suffer.

- We’ve made that mistake. Over a decade ago, we had a habit of sharing everything with everyone in the company. But too much information flow killed focus. We eventually realized it’s the founder’s job to shield the team and protect the company from unnecessary distractions — including over-informing investors or team members on things outside their scope.

- Top non-engineers can be game-changing. A brilliant finance or sales person can be just as valuable — sometimes more valuable — than an engineer. Especially in areas like revenue growth, closing deals, or keeping the company alive through smart financial planning.

- Note that excellent engineers don't want to do finance, sales, etc. and vice versa.

Bottom line: engineers are core for tech company, but they’re not everything. Great companies are built by teams.

Don’t try to reinvent the wheel — unless your company exists to build a better wheel.

I’ve thought about it more seriously. There are two kinds of professionals:

- Technicals – coders, scientists, engineers, artists, builders, etc. - Non-technicals – business people, marketers, writers, policy folks, ops, etc.

There are also two broad skillsets:

- Technical skills – like coding, design, architecture, engineering. - Non-technical skills – and the core of all of these is communication.

The foundation of communication is language. Reading or listening to books, and building core knowledge are how people become strong communicators.

Many of the most successful tech professionals are not just highly skilled technically — they’re also at least above average in communication.

Those who lack communication skills tend to fail — especially in non-technical roles, but sometimes even in technical ones.

That’s why reading and listening to books isn’t optional — it’s essential. Whether you’re in marketing, product, or engineering, communication is a core part of the job.

Not the key factor for success, but a relevant side.

- Well, they worked hard and got into top schools. - Many VCs only fund founders from elite universities. As a result, people from non-Ivy backgrounds often don’t get funded. Even YC and similar funds rarely invest in them. Why does this matter? Because tech companies usually need to burn cash before becoming profitable. VC funding is essential in that early stage. - This wave is changing. AI is making traditional education and degrees irrelevant. - Today’s Ivy League schools are not what they were 10, 20, and 40 years ago. Many talented people are choosing not to attend these expensive institutions. So in the next 10–20 years, expect to see more successful tech founders from non-Ivy backgrounds.

Some names to remember (alphabetical order):

- Brian Chesky - Airbnb (Rhode Island School of Design) - Chris Wanstrath - GitHub (University of Cincinnati, dropout) - Daniel Ek - Spotify (Royal Institute of Technology, dropout) - David Karp - Tumblr (Bronx Science High School, no college) - Evan Williams - Blogger, Twitter, Medium (University of Nebraska–Lincoln, dropout) - Frank Wang - DJI (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) - Jack Dorsey - Twitter (Missouri University of Science and Technology / NYU, dropout) - Jan Koum - WhatsApp (San Jose State University, dropout) - Markus Persson - Mojang (Minecraft) (No college) - Matt Mullenweg - WordPress (University of Houston, dropout) - Melanie Perkins - Canva (University of Western Australia, dropout) - Michael Dell - Dell Technologies (University of Texas at Austin, dropout) - Pavel Durov - Telegram (Saint Petersburg State University) - Richard Liu - JD.com (Renmin University of China) - Steve Jobs - Apple (Reed College, dropout) - Travis Kalanick - Uber (UCLA, dropout) - Whitney Wolfe Herd - Bumble (Southern Methodist University)

Has anyone else tried this kind of setup?

Yes.

We don’t even have the budget to hire non-technical people for tech products. Everybody gotta code. We also avoid feature bloat.

We focus only on core features. If someone has an idea and can build it, they’re welcome to try. But most ideas won’t make it to production.