|
|
|
|
|
|
by kristopolous
2460 days ago
|
|
|
What the person is trying to say is these startups are essentially playing by the rules of "crossing the chasm", "the lean startup" etc, but only in the most theatrical and vapid of ways. It's an application of the startup playbook on something essentially meaningless. Wag is an idea that could be well executed in about 2 million - a trendy app, some "social networking" for dogs and their owners, a form of payment and you're done. Moving on in life, left the building with everything working forever kind of done But this isn't about that, this is startup theater of the absurd and incompetent. Add on to that the myth that competent execution can be done by bozos if you simply give them more money (people don't magically become smarter with more money) and you get this - ships of well paid fools going through the startup motions. A dog walking company... |
|
|
Even so, while I understand your perception and like most people I intuitively feel like it must be true in many cases, I'm missing any sense of what specifically makes it true in this case, other than that "dog-walking" sounds trivial. A line of the form "Wag is an idea that could be well executed in about 2 million" feels to me like it's in the orbit of "I could implement that in a weekend"—the sort of thing people say when they're not personally close to the problem, because everything seems smaller at a distance.
Similarly with what you say about "bozos" and "well-paid fools"—ok, such humans exist, maybe including some of the humans who see others as bozos and fools—but do you know something specific about the individuals here? If you think you do, do you really know it, or might this be hearsay based on very little information? Usually what comments like this do is repeat generic reactions about a common topic, which is actually the opposite of a substantive HN discussion.