See a problem. Figure out how many people it is a problem for. Figure out why no one else has solved that problem. Figure out if you know how to solve the problem. Figure out how much folks would be willing to pay for a solution to the problem. If you asses you are able to be fairly compensated (over long periods of time) for solving the problem after all your costs of solving it are reconciled: Commit to spending vast amounts of your resource to exploring and productizing the solution to said problem. This isn't the advice the author gives. However, here is another post written by the same author: https://rethinkdb.com/blog/rethinkdb-shutdown/
It is not ok to be this sort of an asshole on HN, least of all to Slava and his team, who poured their hearts into RethinkDB for seven years. They have nothing to be ashamed of. Those of us who've followed Slava's work and writing for all that time (and before!) know that we have more reason to listen to him, not less.
It's supercilious comments like yours, which dismiss other people's achievements, that are the shameful thing. I'm ashamed to read them on HN and, even though I know it's human nature, it gives me a sickening feeling to see how they get so upvoted.
First and foremost, I'm not an asshole. I think if you asked anyone who knows me, they will say that I abide pretty heavily to the mantra of kindness that I have tattooed up my hand. Secondly, I wasn't critical of Slava or RethinkDB, although if you'd like me to be critical of either, I'm happy to, specially RethinkDB - I'm not familiar with Slava at all. I had actually written out the steps BEFORE I read the article, and expected to put a "tl;dr" at the start (as I was the first comment). As I read it actually wasn't what the author had penned I added that it wasn't the advice the author gave, and then I realized the author also co-founded Rethink so I tacked that on. There was no malice in this post, I apologize if it came across as smug (as others have mentioned) or wanky. I apologize to Slava if it was seen as an attack, and I apologize to the rethinkdb team if I belittled their efforts. Legitimately, wasn't my intention.
Point happily taken, and I didn't mean that you were an asshole but rather that the comment was a case of being an asshole or at least easily read that way.
This happens a lot on HN and we know it's unintentional, just as we know that the people who upvote such comments aren't doing so maliciously. Unfortunately, positive parts can add up to a negative whole, and good intentions aren't enough. It's a systemic problem, not a personal one.
It's totally fair for you to criticize the content of the post, and even correlate that to the author's failed startup. But don't be so fucking smug about it.
This is a community that celebrates making things people want, and I'll be damned if RethinkDB didn't succeed on that front. I think Slava & co deserve respect for that, even as we learn from whatever business mistakes occurred.
Pretty much all of this post is about unpacking the "See a problem" step of your recipe - if you don't get past that, none of the rest matters.
I'd argue that where RethinkDB fell down is on a step you don't list, "Understand the context of the problem", which you'd ideally do before figuring out how many people it's a problem for. Their initial idea was a MySQL storage engine for SSDs - the environmental change was that SSD prices were falling rapidly, SSDs have wildly different performance characteristics from disk, and so they figured there was an opportunity to catch the next wave. Only problem is that the biggest corporate buyers of SSDs are gigantic tech companies (eg. Google, Amazon) with large amounts of proprietary software, and so a generic MySQL storage engine isn't going to be useful to them anyway.
Unfortunately they'd already taken funding, built a team, and written a lot of code by the time they found that out, and there's only so far you can pivot when you have an ecosystem like that.
As I get older, I don't really buy the "see a problem" step. I'm not sure Facebook really solved any problem. Or Slack, or Twitter, or Snapchat. Or a lot of software startups, for that matter.
I'm sure I could write something contrived about either of them though, something using my 20-20 hindsight glasses: Snapchat solved ephemeral communication. I mean, yeah, I guess it did. But really, it caught on as a pseudo-sexting app. You could say Slack helped "corporate teams communicate better in real time" but we've had chat apps for like 20 years now.. it's basically a carbon-copy of IRC, anyway.
I think a lot of people put way too much stock in trying to find a problem™. Just build something cool, or fun, or useful; and execute it well. IMO, execution will always trump the idea.
- I want to stay in touch with my social circle but just dont have time and/or physical presence to do this
- I like to see what my social peers are doing in life but lose contact.
- I like to tell the world what I am up to.
Maybe not saving the world, but absolutely problem solving. 100% agree with you on doing something cool (with in reason of some business potential) as any new business is a roll of the dice. You may as well roll on something you enjoy regardless of outcome.
All those problems had already been solved prior to FB. MySpace is the obvious example, but there was also Friendster, and a few others. I'm almost certain that FB's success primarily hinged on its exclusivity (Ivy League & a few elite schools -> colleges -> gen pop) and not necessarily on what it did.
Another one: I have only just started using Facebook. Our group, BioHackQLD, is using it as a way to easily create a web presence i.e. our website with our bookmarks. I liked that the admin set up an "Ideas" page and a "Funding Sources" page. I mean it is dead simple to add a comment with a link to a relevant webpage. Easier and zero cost.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/982643618435943/
You're not wrong. But this comment completely lacks substance and doesn't even attempt to address the post.
I don't fully agree with Slava, but at least he makes some thoughtful points. You just typed out a handful of platitudes which sound like they came straight off a Startup Vitamins poster.
Heh. The mention of HPMOR makes me recall this quote from its author, which I am quoting only slightly out of context: "Be careful of this sort of argument, any time you find yourself defining the 'winner' as someone other than the agent who is currently smiling from on top of a giant heap of utility."
I see neither the author of HPMOR nor the author of this blog post smiling from on top of a giant heap of utility. A moderate heap, sure, but it's doubtful it's any larger than the one I have from a non-world-changing but well-paying sysadmin job.
In retrospect TFA seems to be the writing on the wall for this recent event, doesn't it? There is no shortage of DB engine companies, and hasn't been for decades.
> Figure out how much folks would be willing to pay for a solution to the problem.
I agree with other people about being smug. There are certain types of business where the business model is not obvious at least in the beginning, but you know that there's some value that you can potentially monetize.
In these cases, would you be smug like that and just give up trying and work on obvious ideas? Or would you try? It's not everyone's cup of tea, but I totally respect anyone who does that.
A lot of world-changing companies were born that way. Including Google and Facebook.
In my experience it's by talking to lots of people, focusing on those who you suspect "should" have solved it and asking them in great detail about the problem itself. Additionally you'll find that in many cases those with the problem will be happy to tell you either jury-rigged attempts from the past or point you to those who have tried. Interviewing many people is key.
Thank you for answering. As I suspected, a good network is a real deal. Making a good network is too difficult outside a tech hub as SV. Fortunately, we have HN and other online communities.
I think you also have to know who and how to find the resources that you don't have. Especially difficult if you are not in a high tech area like NYC or SF.
Tech talent is everywhere, not just the "hubs". IMO it's the networking that is harder outside that environment; the hubs have a nexus of finance, talent and buzz.
