Unsurprisingly, Paul Graham keeps catering to gullible young white nerd boys that are happy to continually get exploited for his profit.
8
8
20
@janl For a somewhat strange definition of exploitation. Can’t see much reason for feeling sorry for anyone getting funded by YC.
2
@stilkov @janl who got little money, expected to work a lot, small chance to cash out? Who’s guaranteed a return across their portfolio?
1
@assaf I’m not saying PG is doing anything charitable, just that compared to e.g. a job at McDonald’s, it’s clear to me which one I’d take
2
@stilkov yc optimizes for “ramen profitable”, so not far off; but why not compare to 6 figure, nice benefits, work/life balance job?
1
@assaf Yes, that would be my first choice :-) Still don’t see people being exploited. My guess is for close to 100%, it’s a choice they make
1
@assaf Would be different if PG misled them about their chances. Maybe that’s what @janl alluded to, if so, I’d change my mind.
4
@stilkov … now it becomes “multiple data points”, and so what the sophisticated buyer bases their opinion on; have they been led astray?
3
Replying to @assaf
@assaf Nor into the typical it-worked-for-me-so-it’s-the-only-way over generalization

Dec 28, 2013 · 8:46 PM UTC

1
Replying to @stilkov
@stilkov I just think if your influence extends way beyond your little fund, your responsibility should be just as extensive