6 karma · joined November 12, 2024
Yes, but there are many things wrong with equating "better" with "more money" without sparing half a thought to introspection.
Reminds me of a PG essay about a "Dunning-Kruger pass". [0]
When searching for ideas, look in areas where you have some expertise. If you're a database expert, don't build a chat app for teenagers (unless you're also a teenager). Maybe it's a good idea, but you can't trust your judgment about that, so ignore it. There have to be other ideas that involve databases, and whose quality you can judge. Do you find it hard to come up with good ideas involving databases? That's because your expertise raises your standards. Your ideas about chat apps are just as bad, but you're giving yourself a Dunning-Kruger pass in that domain.
[0] https://paulgraham.com/startupideas.htmlTo some extent we have already developed some filtering against Reddit et al to protect our bayesian priors, but many who lack those filters could suffer greatly from encountering the internet.
Moreover, get out of your echo chamber and you’ll see that for a majority of humanity Google is the internet. You have to supplant the utility, not just the brand. Most businesses cannot handle the latter let alone the former. If you want something to replace Google, you have to think about replacing the internet itself. But not many are that bold.
Nobody needs to be co-ordinating thousands of people. 5–20 people can create Instagram. The entire problem in these companies is that leadership is so out of touch they cannot differentiate between a checklist and a product, and empire-building is their proxy for value. The solution is to change the leadership, but it is usually too late in large orgs (the new leadership has to be brought in somehow from somewhere, and that will be done the same way the current leadership happened).
So the real solution is for those who care to go elsewhere, out-compete, and out-succeed. Then quit after acquisition, if such a thing happens.