Today I read an article with the headline "How to Pick the Right Idea for Your Startup." That right there epitomizes exactly what is wrong with startup culture.
Don't have an idea? Don't have a startup.
Ideally, problems could be solved and ideas implemented without the need to form a company, get funding, or turn a profit. Those are simply (often optional) measures that must be taken to help realize the end goal.
I disagree with that. Some of the better startups we've funded changed their idea completely during YC.
It's the founders that matter, not the idea. So I'd say instead: if you're not the right sort of person to start a startup, don't start a startup. But of course that is a complicated matter to decide because (a) people often don't know if they are the right sort of person and (b) people change.
We already do, kind of. We know that a significant fraction of the groups we accept will change their idea, and that we can contribute as much of their new idea as necessary.
Sometimes we even tell people when we accept them that we'll accept them if they do something different. Greplin was one of those.
My experience is that you're not going to have the problem as clearly defined as you thought in the beginning. If you have a capable team and a flexible strategy you can and must redefine the problem you're trying to solve as you learn more about the domain. I would add that as a form a failure in startup culture: To get so enamored with a perceived problem and your proposed solution as to ignore new evidence that should alter that first impression. Sometimes the new information leads you to incremental or 'attainable' adjustments and you adapt and move forward, sometimes you need to pull the ripcord and go back to the drawing board.
Don't have an idea? Don't have a startup.
Ideally, problems could be solved and ideas implemented without the need to form a company, get funding, or turn a profit. Those are simply (often optional) measures that must be taken to help realize the end goal.