confoundcofound

"then YC has a serious messaging problem"

People have been signaling this for quite some time.

Throughout this thread you attempt to dispel this perception, but I can't help but wonder why this isn't being addressed on a higher level at YC. Whether misperception or not, this view is certainly not contained to just HN, and is even shared by those who have no idea that this forum exists.

Really think we are due for the black swan event of user data — payment info, explicit personal photos, private conversations, etc. The average person just has way too much implicit trust in these large corporations who for the most part do not take their privacy obligations seriously.

I’m neither an engineer nor an architect, so this may come off as incredibly naive, but why wouldn’t layers of reinforcement — eg a retaining wall or guardrail — some distance out and around the main pillars help mitigate this kind of risk?

Would be of great service if YC were more upfront about its biases to applicants. The narrative that YC is an accessible path for anyone seems to contradict the actions taken.

Where is the outreach to those outside of elite academic and professional circles?

The stations are filthy, have poor accessibility, the signage is tattered, the PA systems almost never work, the ETAs are often wrong if they’re even offered. That’s aside from the not uncommon sights and smells of piss in the cars themselves. The bus system is a different crapshoot altogether.

I find it interesting how often when people complain about how poor the experience is, there are those like you who seem to be quite content with maintaining a fairly low standard.

It’s so deflating to see both YC & PG focus their content almost solely on the younger generations. As someone who came to tech later in their mid-30s, it’s not hard to feel like expired goods when the “thought leaders” of tech are unabashedly gunning for younger minds with little to no acknowledgement of those who may want to start ventures during later stages of life.

The more I try to plug myself in, the more it seems like starting a company at this age is borderline schizophrenic delusion.

Your real problem is with the state, not with technology.

Something tells me you are wholly unaware of the damage that addiction and obesity can inflict not just on the person afflicted, but on their family, community, and society as a whole. The benefits/costs equation is so massively lopsided here that you'd be cruel to advocate that people endure years of avoidable torment to satisfy your faulty notion of free will / agency. I can't think of anything more agency-promoting than ridding someone of their addictions.

I’m a long time Cron user but didn’t know it had Calendly functionality. How do you share availability?

Fintech, “led” product. And by led, I mean shoot from the hip with no strategy, no experience, and no structure, with a CEO cofounder who from day 1 tried to push me out.

I was sadly incapable of acquiring the mentorship, knowledge, and resources I needed on my own. I was naive and wholly ignorant. I ran around like a headless chicken for 5 years constantly putting out fires and looking over my shoulder.

And now have very little for it.

I naively dropped out of grad school to cofound a startup where I was pushed out at the 11th hour before it was acquired. Took some personal time off to process the fallout and have been doing some consulting the past couple years.

No network. No achievements. No notable educational or professional institutions on the CV. Just what feels like an ever-narrowing path to any sort of career success.

Could never understand people who order a stack of pancakes / waffles first thing in the morning. You couldn’t find a more malnourishing meal. Hell, have a burger and fries instead.

You’ve offered no specific or practical alternatives, just idealistic babble, and are yet calling for the scaling back of direct and actionable enforcement.

People like you, the political climate you create, and the policies you vote for, are largely why our cities are devolving.

What alternatives do you propose other than enforcement?

What sorts of investments do you believe will directly and effectively curb violence and crime?

What does underinvestment have to do with J’Ouvert crime specifically?

Have you lived near where they celebrate J’Ouvert? I used to live in that part of Brooklyn for 10 years and the festival always incited crime and violence in our immediate area.

I’m not saying drones are the answer, but it is not by any means a totally harmless event.

For those downvoting who don’t want to accept reality, below is an article from just a few days ago. It happens every year.

https://www.amny.com/new-york/brooklyn/spate-of-violence-sul...

You think those traits are inherent to being a “person of color”?

Are all of your social circles proportionally composed of genders and races representative of society? If so, why not?

If you are so concerned about proportional ratios, why are you not concerned about the many other minorities that are far more underrepresented than Blacks/Hispanics/Indigenous and that are not eligible for this program?

I am a person of color and am not eligible for this program. Please explain.

Also, that you lump poor whites who grew up in the inner city with those who grew up wealthy in Palo Alto is shocking. That Palo Alto native likely has far more in common with their black neighbor.

You are advocating for racist policies. No matter how you slice your identitarianism, you will never reach total inclusion, perpetually marginalizing and discriminating against minorities you may not even be aware of. Fight on, brother.

Did you forget YC was cofounded by Jessica Livingston?

You’re asking a dangerous question. Most behind these initiatives act as if there are “white” people who are also not culturally underrepresented and do not inhabit lower socioeconomic levels. There are black folks who grew up in BelAir and white folks who grew up poor in Appalachia.

I say that as a “brown” minority, whose immigrant family were the minority even in their own country, who is apparently supposed to self-identify as Caucasian and would not qualify for this program because I’m not Black or Hispanic or Indigenous.

It’s racist.

You’re virtue signaling, plain and simple. No one is forcing you to be verified. It is not mandatory to use the platform.

That he’s “gutting” Twitter seems more like something you hope to see, not something that’s actually happening.

Yep. The initial decision was certainly driven by many stakeholders who deeply believe this is a key advantage to acquire. Users are fighting an uphill battle, and no amount of pushback short of lost revenue will stop them. They'll find another way.

You shouldn't be downvoted.

I don't know if it's willful ignorance or what, but most people can't grok the fact that children do not develop in a vacuum. They are in most cases a reflection of their parents' traits and values. Worse for SBF, it is entirely plausible that they had a direct hand in enabling his fraudulent behavior. They were politically-connected Stanford lawyers. It would be foolish to dismiss the possibility of them opening doors and providing cover for their son.

Perhaps an extreme comparison, but I feel the same exact way about adolescent school shooters. We are so quick to absolve and sanctify the parents as if their child's violent tendencies emerged suddenly and spontaneously.

Future.co does this too and it was really irritating. 20 screens of questions, interstitial ads for the product I'm signing up for sprinkled throughout, all to funnel me to a payment page for a service experience that isn't commensurately influenced by my inputs. They make you do an introductory call with your coach too, where much of that information could be provided instead, and in a more human way.

My problem is with the collective gaslighting the crypto industry is doing with respects to utility vs speculation. I never thought I would find myself on the side of the SEC, but I have enough experience in the space with investors to builders to confidently say the vast majority of the industry is about speculative gain. Specious claims of utility are often just a means to that end.

The biggest lie in crypto is that tokens are bought for utility and not speculative gains. I don't know if it's delusion or intentional deception. I have friends who are "thought leaders" in the space, who opine on the disruptive potential of crypto yet spend their days tweeting about the latest memecoin that just 100x'd.

The entire concept of crypto "value" rests upon the marriage of token utility and economic value. Financial gain is baked into the mechanic. And between the two, people care far more about financial gain. It's a fundamental misalignment of incentives.

I have bad news: it may be time to go back to the real world

Exactly, tech is hellbent on preserving our humanity while discarding the embodied world that makes us human. It's a schizoid's fantasy.

Would you say this is a niche use case? Can you see the masses using Monero with its current user experience?

I have talked to people in the space exactly about this and have been accused of "boomer mentality" as a dude in his 30s. The industry seems to be run by "move fast, break things" idealists who don't understand that they're playing with others people's hard-earned money and that things breaking may have serious implications.

They think sending out a tweet alerting users of a scam is an adequate anti-fraud solution.