Paul Graham: illogical startup

Original author: Paul Graham
  • Transfer


Stanford course CS183B: How to start a startup . Started in 2012 under the leadership of Peter Thiel. In the fall of 2014, a new series of lectures by leading entrepreneurs and experts of Y Combinator took place:


First part of the course

It is good to be a father, because when you need to give someone advice, you can ask yourself: “What would I say to my own children?” You will notice that this question can give your thoughts the right direction. My children are still small - my two-year-old son, today, when asked what will happen to him in a year, said: "I will be a bat." The correct answer would be: "I will be three years old," but the option with the bat is much more interesting. And although my children are small, I already know that I will tell them about startups if they go to college - and that’s exactly what I’m going to tell you now. You will literally hear what I would say to my own children, since most of you are young enough to be my son and daughter.

Startups - things are very illogical - I really don’t really know why.Maybe it’s simply because knowledge about them has not yet been introduced into our culture, but, whatever the reason, statues are not an area where you can constantly rely on intuition. In this sense, they are like skiing.

Did any of you guys learn to ski as an adult? When you first start skiing and want to slow down, the first thought you have is to lean back because this instinctive movement “works” in all other situations. But try to ski like this, and you will fly head over heels from the mountain. As I found out from personal experience, an important element of learning to ski is the ability to suppress this impulse. Over time, this will become a habit, but at first, going down the mountain, you just try to keep a list of things in your head: you need to alternate the leading leg, try to follow the s-shaped curves, do not “fall” onto the inside of the foot and all that jazz.

Startups are just as unnatural as skiing, and for startups there is also a similar list that you need to remember to get started. Today I will tell you about the first points in this list of illogical things that you need to memorize in order to prevent your instincts from misleading you.


1. Do not believe your instincts


I just named the first item on this list: startups are so strange that if you follow your instincts, they [instincts] will lead you astray. If you only remember this thing, then before you make a mistake, you can stop and think.

When I ran Y Combinator, we joked that our task was to tell the founders things that they would ignore - and it really was. Over and over again, YC partners warned the founders of the mistakes that they were ready to make, and over and over again, startupers ignored these warnings, and then returned with the words: “It’s a pity that I didn’t listen to you then.” And now, among the co-owners of the startup, there is some strange character, and the founders can not do anything about it.

Question from the audience: Why are the founders so persistently ignoring the advice of partners?
Paul Graham: This is the catch of illogical ideas - they contradict your intuition, they seem wrong, so, of course, you want to immediately ignore them and, in fact, this is not only a curse of YC, but also to some extent the meaning of our existence. You do not need advisers who will say what you already know. If the founders' intuition prompted them with the right answers, they would not need us.

Therefore, there are many alpine skiing instructors in the world and not so many running instructors - you do not see the point in the phrase “running instructor”, but it seems to you that there is a sense in the words “ski instructor”. That's because skiing is illogical, which is why YC is a kind of business ski instructor - except, perhaps, in business, you should ideally move uphill rather than slide downhill.

However, you can trust your instincts when it comes to people. Until recently, your life was a little like a startup, but the way you interact with people in ordinary life and the way this interaction happens in the business world are things of the same order. In fact, one of the big mistakes that the founders make is that they do not fully trust their intuition about people. They meet someone who, it seems, makes a good impression, but deep down they suspect something is amiss, and subsequently it all crawls out, and the founders can only say:

“You know, I suspected that something would go wrong with this guy, but I didn't pay attention to it because he made such a good impression.”


There are representatives of a special type of thinking in business, it is typical for founders with a technical education, which, it seems to me, all of you have. You think that business is such a somewhat unpleasant activity. Therefore, when you meet people who seem smart, but slightly unpleasant, you think: “OK, this must be normal for business,” but that’s not so.

Just pick people the same way you choose friends. This is one of those rare occasions where you can indulge yourself. Work with people who you like, and whom you could respect, and whom you know long enough to be sure of, because there are a lot of people who can successfully pretend to be “suitable.” Just wait for the situation when your interests diverge, and you will see everything for yourself.

2. Do not try to become a startup expert


The next illogical moment - it may disappoint you somewhat - is that in order to succeed in a startup, you do not need to be an expert on startups. This distinguishes our classes from any others that you can attend.

If you study French, you can speak French at the end of your studies. You will learn, you will not necessarily speak exactly like a born Frenchman, although it is quite similar. Our classes may teach you to understand startups, but this is not what you need to know. To succeed in a startup, you do not need to be an expert on startups, you need to be an expert on your users .


Mark Zuckerberg did not succeed in Facebook because he knew about startups, he succeeded even though he did not understand anything at all about startups - Facebook was first registered in Florida [and not in Delaware]. Even you guys understand that this is no good. He succeeded, despite the fact that he did not understand anything in startups, because he was very well versed in his users.

Most of you do not know the mechanics of attracting investment from business angels, right? If you worry about it, stop it. I am ready to say that Mark didn’t know that either. Even if he drew attention to the fact that Ron Conway wrote him a check for a large amount, now he probably does not remember about it at all.

In fact, it doesn’t concern me that studying the mechanics of creating a startup in detail is essentially pointless, but that it can be dangerous in some way, since another typical mistake of young founders is the desire to go through all the known stages of creating a startup. They get a fairly sane idea, they attract investments to add value to their project, and then they rent an office somewhere on South Market Street in San Francisco [the place where the offices of many successful startups are located - GitHub, Dropbox, AirBnB], they’re gaining a crowd of acquaintances into a team, and suddenly they realize that the project is slowly going down to the bottom because, imitating all the external attributes of a startup, they ignored the only truly important thing: they did not create the product people needed . 


We saw that this happens so often - I mean a situation where people are addicted to the process of creating a startup - that we even came up with the name for this: "A house for games." In the end, I realized why this is happening: the reason why young founders seek to copy the external attributes of a startup is that they have been taught this very thing all their life to the present moment.

Think about what you need to get to college: extracurricular work?
Let's figure it out. Even during college, most of everything that you do consists in completely far-fetched work like running in circles - I do not criticize the educational system for this - the work that needs to be done to learn something inevitably contains an element of unnaturalness . And if, for example, you begin to monitor the quality of people’s work, they will inevitably use the resulting difference in measurements and create an abstraction of such a level that all your calculations will for the most part reflect something that does not really exist.


I admit, I did the same thing in college - this is a good way to get high marks. I realized that most subjects contain only twenty to thirty ideas that are formulated so that they can ask questions on the exam. Therefore, when I was preparing for exams in these subjects, I did not try to understand the material, I tried to understand what questions they could ask me and worked out the answers to them in advance.

The task for me was not to understand that I would answer the exam, but to figure out which of the examination questions I had thought up could actually come across to me. So I could instantly calculate my score - I could go to the exam and see how many questions I essentially guessed. This approach "worked" on almost all subjects, especially those related to computer science. Take, for example, the theory of automata - there are very few things about which you can ask specific questions in the framework of the theory of automata.


And it is not surprising that after they have been effectively trained to play such games all their lives, first of all, the young founders who create the startup try to calculate the rules of this new game. What kind of "extracurricular work" do startups do, what do I need to do? It so happened that a measure of the success of startups is the amount of funds raised - and this is another mistake of the founders. They always want to know what the catch is, what tricks are there to help convince investors. And we are forced to tell them that the best way to convince investors is to establish a really working fast-growing startup , and just tell them about it.

Then the startups say: well, and what are the special techniques for ensuring rapid growth - this issue is compounded by the presence of a term such as “Growth Hacks”. Wherever you hear someone discussing growth hacking, just mentally replace this word with “bullshit”, because, as we constantly tell the founders, the only way to make your project grow is to do something that like users and tell them about it . That's all you need, that's all growth hacking.

A lot of conversations between partners from YC and the founders begin with the founders saying: "Like me ...", and the partners answer: "Just ...". Why does everyone love to make things so confusing? For many years, being puzzled by this question, I eventually understood the reason: people are looking for “tricks”, tricky moves in everything. They are trained to seek them out.

3. Do not try to outsmart the system.


And this is the third illogical thing you need to know about startups: starting to work on a startup, you can no longer "find loopholes in the system." You can continue to beat the system if you work for a large company. Depending on how bad things are going there, you can succeed with the help of someone's protection, you can impress others as a productive employee by sending letters late at night or - if you're a smart guy - by changing the time settings on your computer - no one checks the contents of the headers block, right? Yes, I like the audience that understands my jokes. If I said this at a business school, they would ask me: “What? Headers? What does the headline have to do with it? ” Oh hell, I just realized that they were recording me on video. From this moment I will tell everything strictly according to plan.

So, in startups, this approach will not work. There is no boss who can be deceived - how to deceive the one who is not? There are only your users, and it is important for all of them that your product does what they want to get, right? They are like sharks, sharks are too stupid to try to hold them; you cannot wave a red rag and trick them - in their understanding, there is either meat or it is not. The danger - especially for you - lies in the fact that unfair play to a certain extent works against investors.


If you know very well what you are talking about, then you can fool an investor by one, maybe two rounds of financing, but doing so is not in your interests. I mean that you are doing this to increase your own capital, so it’s dishonest to do this in relation to yourself. This is a waste of your own time: if a startup is doomed, all you do is kill time on it. Therefore, do not try to outsmart the system. In the field of startups, there are tricks in the same way as in other areas, but their significance and effect are an order of magnitude lower than solving real problems.

For someone who does not understand anything in raising capital, but who does what his users like, it will be much easier to get financing than for someone who knows all the book tricks, but whose product no one uses.

In a sense, it’s bad news for you to outwit the system in this area. This robs you of your most powerful weapon — in the end, you spent twenty years mastering it.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that existence in a world where, in order to win, there is no point in tricking, is very exciting. Studying in college, I would be delighted with the thought that in the world there are situations in which “short cuts” mean very little, or even mean nothing at all. And they are: this is one of the most important things that you should think about when planning your future. How to “win” at each stage of the work, and what will this gain give you?

This leads us to the fourth illogical truth about startups. If you create a startup, it will capture a huge part of your life, more than you can imagine. And if your startup succeeds, it will absorb your life for a long time, at least for several years, or even for a dozen years, and possibly for the whole time until the end of your career.

4. It will never be easier


It may seem to you that Larry Page lives a life that can only be envied, but in this life there are moments that you really don't make sense to envy. For him, everything looks as if at 25 he started to run as fast as he could, and since then he has not been able to rest for a second. Every day in the Google Empire, there is some kind of dirty trick that only the emperor can deal with, and he, as the emperor, really has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation for at least a week, a whole mountain of such dirty tricks accumulates behind him, and he has to rake it up without complaint, because, firstly, he, as the “father of the company”, cannot show a shadow of fear or weakness and secondly, if you are a billionaire who complains about the difficulties of life, no one will ever sympathize with you.


This all has a strange side effect: the difficulties of a successful startup’s life are hidden from the vast majority of those who have not yet succeeded. Go up to the man who just won the hundred meter race at the Olympics - he will desperately try to catch his breath. Larry Page does the same, but you will never see it.

Y Combinator has already funded several companies that can be called extremely successful, and in each case, the founders said the same thing: "It will never be easier." The causes of the problems are changing, so you may be worried about larger things, such as the delay in building your new London office, and not about a broken air conditioner in your one-room apartment, but the total amount of anxiety never decreases. He is probably only growing.

To start work on a successful startup is the same as deciding to have children: as if you are pushing a button and everything in your life is irrevocably changing. To be honest, children are, of course, wonderful, but if you need to remember one single thing from this lecture, remember this: there are a lot of things that are much easier to do before you have children - and many of these things will make you a better parent when you still have children. In affluent countries, most postpone the “push of a button” for a while, and I think that you are very familiar with this rather intimate procedure. But at the same time, when it comes to startups, many believe that they should be created while studying at college.

Are you crazy? What are universities thinking about?
They go out of their way to make sure that all students are provided with contraceptives, and at the same time open up entrepreneurial programs and start-up incubators right and left.

To be honest, in this situation, universities act against their will. A lot of students entering universities are interested in startups. Universities, at least de facto, should prepare you for your working future, therefore, if you are interested in business. They should give you an education related to this topic, otherwise they will simply lose applicants.

So can universities give you knowledge on how to create a startup (and if not, what are we doing here)?Yes and no, as I told you about startups. In fact, if you want to study French, universities can teach you linguistics. And here it’s the same. This is linguistics: we teach you how to learn languages, while you want to know a specific language.

What you really need to know is what your user wants. You can’t learn this without creating a company, which means that in reality you can learn startups only from your own experience. In college, this will not work for the reason that I just talked about. A startup will absorb all your time. If you create a startup in college as a student, you will not be able to “sit on two chairs,” because if you create a startup, you will cease to be a student. Nominally you will be a student, but not for long.

If you had such a choice, what would you do?

Stay true students and do not open companies or create a startup and drop out of the university. I can’t choose for you.

I appeal to you now, as I would appeal to my own children: do not create startups while you study . I hope I have not disappointed anyone here. Creating a startup can be an excellent component of a vibrant life for many ambitious people. This is just part of the much bigger problem you are trying to solve. The problem is how to live a vibrant life. To a certain extent, a startup in this sense is a sure step. But twenty years is not the best age for this.


There are things that at the age of twenty you can do much better than a few years before or after. For example, you can immerse yourself in the project, following your whims and without the hope that it will pay off. You can travel cheap without worrying about deadlines. To non-ambitious people, such things may seem dangerous adventures. Ambitious people may think that this is some kind of valuable research, but if you create a startup at twenty-something and succeed, you will not have time for them.


Mark Zuckerberg will never be able to leisurely relax abroad. If he travels to another country, he either makes a de facto formal visit or hides incognito in a fashionable hotel, such as George V in Paris.

He will never be able to travel with a backpack behind Thailand - do people still do that? More people traveling around Thailand with backpacks? Oh, for the first time in my lecture, I see that the audience has shown enthusiasm. It was necessary in Thailand to tell all about it.

He can do what you cannot do — for example, take off a plane to travel abroad. Very big plane. But success squeezed out of his life happy accidents, insights, spontaneity. Facebook controls it to the same extent that it controls Facebook. 


Despite the fact that being under a certain pressure from a project that you consider to be the work of your whole life is not bad, insights have their advantages . Among other things, they give you more options for choosing the direction of “the work of your whole life”. In this case, you do not even need to pay for it.

You don’t sacrifice anything if you refrain from creating a startup at twenty-odd, because the probability of success in this enterprise will only increase if you wait. The likelihood that you will launch a third-party project in your twenty that will “shoot” like Facebook, after which you will be faced with the choice: to stay in the project or to leave and choose to stay, is astronomically small.

Because startups usually “shoot” only when the founders push them in every way. It is extremely stupid to try to achieve this at twenty-odd.


Should I do this at a different age? Creating a startup is quite difficult - if I have not yet clarified this point, then I will try again. So, creating a startup is very difficult . And if it is really too hard, what if you are not ready for such difficulties?

5. You never know for sure


The answer is contained in the fifth illogical truth about startups: you never know for sure. Thanks to the accumulated experience, you already imagine what prospects could open before you if you wanted to become mathematicians or professional footballers. This is not true for every audience. But in your life you were unlikely to often do something similar to creating a startup - unless your life before that moment was very, very strange.

I mean, creating a startup will make a big difference if you succeed. Therefore, you need to try to evaluate not what you are now, but what you could become. And who can give an exact answer to this? Certainly not me. For the past nine years, I have only been doing what I was trying to guess - this was my job (I wrote “predict” in the notes and said “guess” instead - a Freudian clause).

Seriously, it’s very easy in ten minutes to determine how smart a person is. Throw a pair of tennis balls over the net and see if he can beat them so that they do not fly away unclear where - this is not difficult. The most difficult and important part of my work was to predict how stubborn and ambitious the candidates would be.

In solving this problem, perhaps, there is no more experienced person than me. I can say that the expert understands this: not so much. My experience has taught me to remain completely unbiased about which startups from each set will become stars. Sometimes the founders think that they knew what the future holds for them. Some come, convinced that they are gutting the Y Combinator exactly like they did with the few tests that were completely distant from reality that they had encountered in life before. Others come, thinking that they got into Y Combinator by mistake, and hope that no one will know about it.


There is virtually no correlation between these approaches and the future of the startup. I read that the same is true for the army. Boastful recruits have no more chances to become professional fighters than quiet people, most likely for the same reason. The tasks that need to be solved at this stage are too different from everything that a person has encountered before. If you are scared to death by the prospect of creating a startup - you better not do it. Unless you are one of those people who excel at something by stepping over fear. Otherwise, if you are simply not sure whether you can succeed, the only way to verify this is to create a startup, not right now.


So, if you want to create a startup one day, what do you need to do in college now? There are two tasks that now need to be solved: come up with an idea and find co-founders. Both of these are achieved in the same way, which leads us to the sixth and final illogical truth about startups.

6. Do not try to extort an idea


You can come up with the idea of ​​a startup without thinking specifically about such ideas. I wrote an entire essay on this subject and do not want to repeat it here in its entirety. In short, the point is that if you consciously try to come up with the idea of ​​a startup, you will get not just a bad idea, but a bad idea that looks plausible. And this means that such an idea will mislead you and everyone around you. You will spend a lot of time before you realize that there is nothing good in your idea. You can come up with a good startup idea by stepping back a step. Instead of consciously making an effort on yourself and deciding what to do, you should turn to a state in which ideas come to you yourself.

In fact, this process proceeds so out of control of your consciousness that at first you won’t understand that the thought that came to your mind may be the idea of ​​a startup. Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Apple were created that way. At first, none of these companies was thought of as a company - they were just third-party projects. The best ideas, as a rule, arise as third-party projects , because they are so different from your usual affairs that your mind rejects them as ideas on which the company can be built.


If ideas come unconsciously, then what is up to you?
  • First, learn a lot of important things for you.
  • Secondly, work on issues that interest you.
  • Thirdly, do this together with those who you like and whom you respect.

This third part of the decision, by the way, is a way to simultaneously find both an idea and co-founders. At first in this paragraph I wrote: “First, improve your knowledge of a certain technology”, but such advice seemed to me too narrow.

Interestingly, Brian Chasky and Joe Gebbia of Airbnb weren't technology experts. They studied art, were design specialists. Perhaps most importantly, they knew how to organize people around themselves and achieve tasks. Therefore, you do not need to study technology as such if you are already working on something that requires maximum effort.


How to understand that what you are doing is a good thing?
It is very difficult to answer this question in general terms. The story is full of examples of how young people worked on issues that no one at that time took into account. In particular, the parents of these young people. On the other hand, the story is full of examples of how parents believed that their children were wasting time, and in the end were right - there are much more such examples.

For example, when Justin.tv turned into Twitch TV and decided to broadcast on the air how people play computer games, I thought: “What kind of nonsense?”, But it turned out that this is a profitable business. I only know that working on real problems is interesting, and here I can follow my own preferences: I always liked to work on something interesting, even if no one was concerned .

It’s very difficult for me to get myself to work on something boring, even if these things are of great importance to me. My life is full of examples of how I worked on something simply because I was interested, and then these things became useful to many people.

Even Y Combinator is a thing that I started working on simply because it seemed interesting to me. I think I have some kind of internal compass that guides me. But you are not me, and I do not know what is going on in your head. Maybe if I study this question more deeply, I will come up with some kind of heuristic concept for defining really interesting ideas. But for now, all I can offer is a hopelessly unfounded statement. Incidentally, it contains the true meaning of the word "unfounded." So, the hopelessly unfounded statement sounds like this: if you are generally interested in interesting problems, then the energetic satisfaction of curiosity can be an excellent preparation for creating a startup, and at the same time a wonderful life principle.


Although I cannot give a general definition of an interesting problem, I can tell you about its large component. If you think technology is something that spreads like a fractal pattern, every detail of this pattern can be an interesting problem. Steam engines are not so interesting these days, although who knows. So, a way to surely turn to the perception of unconsciously emerging startup ideas is to start exploring the latest technological advances.

As Paul Buckheit said about this, “Live the future.”

And when you immerse yourself in this study, ideas that may seem prophetic to others will be obvious to you. You may not recognize startup ideas in them, but you will know that sooner or later something similar will happen.


As an example, let's return to Harvard in the mid-90s.
A classmate of my friends, Trevor wrote his own VoIP program. It was not a startup, and he never tried to create a company on it. He just wanted to chat with his girlfriend, who lived in Taiwan without overpaying for long international calls.

Since he was an expert on networks, it seemed obvious to him to convert sound to digital format and transmit it over the Internet for free. Why didn't others do this? Others were not so talented as to create good enough software of this type. He never tried to turn it into anything more. I did not want to create a startup from this. So the best startups appear.


The most optimal behavior strategy in college is that if you want to become a successful startup founder, you should not go to any new entrepreneurship training program. This is a classic version of university education for education. If you want to create a startup, you need to study serious things in college, and if you have this inborn curiosity and thirst for knowledge, you just need to follow your inclinations.

The only element of entrepreneurship - I can never say this word without a smile - which really matters - this is expertise in the chosen field. Larry Page would not be Larry Page if he had not become a search expert, and he became one because he was genuinely interested in this topic, and not because of some other hidden motives. A startup at its best is simply a desire to satisfy genuinely curiosity, and the best way to create it is to put curiosity first. Therefore, my last advice to young people who want to become founders of startups can be expressed in a nutshell: just learn .

Well, how much time do we have left? Eighteen minutes for your questions - not bad. Do you guys have any questions?


Q: How can a non-techie founder contribute as efficiently as possible to a startup?
Paul: If a startup works in a certain area, if it is not a purely technological startup, but a project working in a specific industry, such as Uber, where the non-technical founder was an expert on premium cars, then the non-technical founder will be to do most of the work, that is, hire drivers and do everything else that Uber does, and the technical founder will only have to write an application for the iPhone, well, for the iPhone and Android - but this is less than half of all the work. Well, if the startup is exclusively technical, then the founder of the non-techie will be engaged in sales and bring coffee with sandwiches to the programmer.


Q: Is there any value in attending a business school for people who want to do business?
Paul: Not really. It sounds not diplomatic, but business schools were created to teach people about management. Management is a problem that occurs in a startup only if it shows serious success. Therefore, all you need to know in the early stages of creating a successful product is how to develop it. Therefore, it’s better to go to a design school if you really want to go somewhere to study. Although, to be honest, if you want to learn something, just do it. I used to give the wrong advice - I advised people interested in startups to work for several years in another company before creating their own. But honestly, the best way to learn how to create startups is simply to try to do it.


You may not succeed, but you will learn faster just by trying. Business schools are trying hard to teach you these things. But they were designed to prepare people for managerial positions in large companies - this was the whole business before - you had the choice: either to become a manager either in a large company or in a store like Joe's Shoe Store. Then something new appeared, Apple, which at first was as small as the Joe's Shoe Store, but turned into a giant corporation, but Apple was not created for this world [the dichotomy of large corporations and small stores] and it’s good at what is he doing. It just has to act and make the whole business community spin.


Q: Management only becomes a problem when you are successful. But what about your first two to three employees?
Paul: Ideally, you succeed even before you hire two or three people. Ideally, for a long time, you don’t even need these two or three employees. When you hire these first two or three people, they become akin to the co-founders. They need to be motivated by what motivates you, it should not be people who need to be managed. This is not an office, these people should be your colleagues and you do not need to apply the principles of management to them.


Q: That is, if someone needs to be managed, then this person cannot become a co-founder?
Paul: If you need super-technical solutions to create a product, and you know that there is one clever man in the world who knows how to implement these solutions better than anyone else, but he can’t wipe yourself snot - yes, in this case it may be beneficial for you to hire such a wise guy and wipe the snot behind him. In general, you need those who can immediately motivate themselves and in this will be similar to the co-founder.

Q: Do you think this will not become a “soap bubble”?
Paul: I will give you two answers to this question. First of all, ask me questions that will be useful for this audience, because there are people here who want to learn how to create startups, and on this topic I have more information prepared than anyone else, and you ask me as a reporter who cannot come up with any interesting question.

I will answer. There is a difference between just rising prices and a bubble. A “bubble” is a very special form of price increases when people deliberately pay too much money for something, hoping to subsequently resell the goods to some even bigger fool. That's what happened in the late 90s, when venture capitalists deliberately invested the devil knows what startups, thinking that they can bring them to IPO and sell them to other investors before everything collapses.


I was there, at the epicenter of events. Now the situation is completely different. Prices are high, valuations are high, but this does not mean that a “bubble” is coming. Each product has a price that rises and falls according to a schedule like a sine wave. The prices are definitely high. I don’t think that when you seek funding, you will just get money - who knows, maybe between today and this moment the Chinese economy will collapse and a terrifying recession will ensue. Get ready for the worst. But not to the appearance of a “bubble”.


Q: Are projects like Idealab promising - a new project by Garrett Kemp?
Paul: This is a new type of project - laboratories, from which startups should "budge" as planned. They can shoot, something like this began the story of Twitter.

Twitter at first was not Twitter at all in the modern sense. It was a third-party project of a company called Odeo and doing business in the podcast industry - so you can say: “business in the podcast industry?” And when this practice of creating multiple startups within one company spread, the question arose whether this would work? Probably yes, if the right people will do it. However, you can hardly work in this way, because you have to do it with your own money.

Q: What advice would you give to the founding girl who wants to receive funding?
Paul: It probably makes sense to say that it’s more difficult for a woman to get financing. Experience tells me that this is so - we will soon publish a collection of interviews from the founding girls of startups - many of them believe that it was more difficult for them to get money from investors than their male counterparts.

Remember what I talked about how to get financing? Make your startup really work - this is especially important if you in one way or another do not correspond in some way with the ideas of the venture capitalist about the ideal startup and project.

A year or two ago, there was a time when I posted a company’s growth chart on Twitter, but didn’t write what the company was. I knew that people would start asking - in fact, it was a startup founded by a girl and who had problems with financing, despite the fact that his growth indicators were amazing.

So, I published this chart, knowing that many venture capitalists will ask me the question: “What kind of company is this?” Growth indicators have no gender. Therefore, let investors see the graph of growth indicators first, let the data on the company interest venture capitalists. Work efficiently - this is a great tip for any startup.


Q: What would you like to study in college if you went to study right now?
Paul: Literally, theory, I'm not joking. Honestly, I believe that I can try and learn physics - I feel that I lack this knowledge. For one reason or another, when I was a child, everyone was interested in computers - perhaps the situation has not changed even now.

I was very inspired to learn programming - you can write real programs without leaving your bedroom. But a real particle accelerator in the bedroom cannot be built. Yes, maybe I would study physics, quite possibly. I don’t know if this would help me create a startup or not, but I told you that I need to follow my own curiosity, so what difference does it help or not, in the end it could not help me.


Q: Are there “recharging” systems in your work and personal life that ensure your effectiveness?
Paul: Having children is a good way to be effective. Because you do not have too much time left - if you want something to be done, the number of finished things per unit of time should be very large.

By the way, many parents, who are also co-founders of startups, unequivocally demonstrate the veracity of this situation. Children make you prioritize - because you have no choice.

I would not recommend having children just to improve the quality of your prioritization. You know, I don’t think that I’m working very productively. I have two ways to get things done: the first is related to working in Y Combinator - when I worked on Y Combinator, I was also under pressure. I had to set a deadline for filing applications, and then people submitted them, and by a certain date I needed to give all of them an answer. Therefore, I had to read all these statements, and I knew that if I did this inattentively, we would recruit failed startups, so I tried and selected the applications very carefully.

So I created a situation for myself that forced me to work. Another type of work that I do is writing articles. I do this of my own free will, I walk along the street, and the text of the article begins to form in my head. Or I have to force myself to work on less interesting things, although I cannot deny myself the opportunity to work on something interesting. I do not know useful techniques to increase efficiency. If you work on what you like, you do not need to force yourself to be effective.

Q: How to determine the moment when a third-party project must be turned into a startup?
Paul: You yourself will understand this - the project becomes a real startup when it begins to fill up a menacingly large part of your life. You’ll catch yourself thinking: “Oh God, I spent the whole day on a third-party project, but I won’t pass the exams, what am I doing?” Perhaps at this moment the third-party project will begin to turn into a startup.

What to do when a startup grows, but not very fast?
Paul: They didn’t tell you that you should read the article “Do what cannot be scaled”? I wrote a whole essay to answer your question. Just read it - I don’t remember the whole content right now, but it’s about what interests you.


Q: Which startups, in your opinion, should not go through a business incubation program?
Paul: Those who will not succeed. Or those who will succeed, but who will be led by terrible, unbearable people. Sam [Altman] is also likely to manage without them. I can’t name more precise criteria, because - and this is very surprising for startup founders - a huge number of very different young companies, regardless of their line of business, face the same problems. And these are exactly the problems that YC helps to work on - most of them are industry-specific. In the last set, we generally had a startup from the field of nuclear fusion.


Q: Are there any good approaches to identify important topics that the founder should consider?
Paul: This is if you think that technology is spreading like a fractal pattern, then everything that is at the “forefront” of technology can contain attractive ideas. You are right, I did not give an exact answer to your question in the lecture - instead, I made an unfounded statement. If I think that I am interested in really interesting things, and you think that you are interested in really interesting things, then work on them and they will lead you to success.

How to understand what of these things is worth the effort and time, and what is not? I don’t know the answer, and perhaps I should write something on this topic, but now I’m unlikely to tell you anything specific. I have developed a technique that allows you to determine if you have a flair for problems that may be of interest to a large circle of people.

The technique is as follows: you have a flair if you think that working on boring things is unbearable, and you know what things are boring for most people (and for you). For example, the theory of literature or the work of a middle manager in a large company. If you can come to terms with such things, then you are either amazingly self-disciplined, or you don’t have a flair for interesting tasks.


Q: Do you like Snapchat?
Gender: Snapchat? What do I know about him? That we did not finance it. The next question.

Q: How to work with the “blind spots” that arise due to the monoculture formed in the team?
Paul: When creating a startup, a lot of things will go wrong. The benefits of hiring people you know that you like outweigh the small disadvantages of creating a monoculture. Look at the statistics - all the most famous founders have recruited classmates into their team.


[ Translation of Adora Chung’s next lecture ]

Also popular now: