[_3u10]

If someone hires me to write something for them I write that for them, if they ask me for advice I give them advice. I don't get into arguments about how their idea won't work, or call them 'stupid', I charge them my rate for the work they ask me to do and I thank them when they pay me.

You think the guys at the general store in 1849 told the gold prospectors that they were stupid and would lose their money? Or do you think they smiled, told them about the guy who just discovered millions in gold, wished them luck and sold them tents, picks, and levis?

[SatvikBeri]

That's not the point of the post. The OP is saying that a lot of would-be entrepreneurs are vastly underestimating the amount of work involved in creating the actual software, and that the would-be entrepreneurs need a technical cofounder rather than an employed programmer.

To use your analogy, this would be more like the store owners telling the prospectors, correctly, that they would also need to find legal help to protect any land they found, security to keep them from getting mugged, etc.

[etherael]

I think OP's point to this is that doing that would not be a good business move. I don't believe that in the canonical scenario simply telling the party in question that things are much more complicated than they can possibly imagine and expecting them to accept that is realistic.

I have been a part of projects where first day in discussing the basics of the project the entrepreneur in question has the design "95% complete" which then after the first four hours fluctuates somewhere between 0-20% complete. And all these numbers may as well be randomly chosen for how much of a relation to reality they have at any rate.

Sell them the picks and tents, let them figure it out themselves. When they come back to you with their problems and ask for advice they will finally actually be listening to reason without thinking that their individual case is an exception to the rules and you're just trying to drain their precious equity.

[sopooneo]

It's true. They won't listen until after the journey. See Wizard of Oz.

[noduerme]

So very right. This is why I charge by the hour and refer clients who don't like it to India. They come back eventually, defeated, but you know they're worthless dorm room hacks. Some of them will end up on wall street, and a few of them might eventually find jobs where they actually have to work to, y'know, make something. The rest will live on daddy's trust fund. We're towing them, not the other way around. Screw 'em. Let them beg on the street.

If God had truly blessed these people with big enough brains to come up with brilliant ideas, He would have given them the capacity to learn, at the very least, enough PHP or Ruby to build a wireframe. I don't see how anyone who can't do that could have an idea that would be worth wasting time on.

[saurabh]

>This is why I charge by the hour and refer clients who don't like it to India.

Why don't you refer them to people in your own country? Why India?

[facorreia]

I'm interested in how and why you would use PHP or Ruby to build a wireframe.

[larrys]

"and that the would-be entrepreneurs need a technical cofounder"

Part of the problem with this idea (as someone else commented "goes around like a windmill") is that a non-technical person is even in a position to judge the skills of a technical person (or vice versa).

At least if you hire a programmer you can fire a programmer. If you take on the wrong co-founder (who doesn't have the ability or skills you thought they had) then what do you do?

[JoeAltmaier]

Try, try again. Like anything else, you have to take risks.

People who buy into "I can't make all the judgement calls with perfect accuracy" don't become entrepreneurs.

[lusr]

Development work is nowhere NEAR the same as selling somebody something.

It involves defining scope, deliverables and timelines. It involves a long-term commitment from two parties: you to provide skill and effort, and them to support you (because there WILL be gaps in the requirements) and pay you.

In my experience in these "I've got an idea" situations, once you attempt to define the project concretely the client frequently realizes how far in over their head they are and changes their mind. And if you're not defining these things upfront then you're running a very risky business model: if you don't know timelines, how do you know how much budget they need to afford you? If you don't whether they can afford you, you're taking a big chance accepting the project.

(And if you are defining these things and realize the guy isn't going to succeed but take the work anyway without warning him, you're unethical).

[JoeAltmaier]

You've not been a contractor? All you have are hours to sell, and its very similar to selling a pick or shovel.

Unethical? If you had a crystal ball that could predict the success of every new idea, sure its unethical to keep it secret. But just because you don't personally think its a good idea- well, it'd be unethical to put your bias in the way of this guy succeeding despite your doubt.

[lusr]

I am an independent contractor.

There are two types of contractors, and I have been both:

1. The "warm body" that does indeed just sell hours, usually via a labour broker or development house. They fulfil a "development resource" capacity required on the project, and typically there is already a project structure (plan(s), schedule(s) and management) in place. They are not directly responsible for the deliverables of the project. I am a warm body contractor because (2) freaks me out.

2. The "development house" (can just be one person despite the term) who initiates and manages the project in addition to doing the work. They have to define the project, agreeing on scope, timeline and budget because they are party to a contract and are directly responsible for the deliverables. If they screw any of these parts up (and that includes due diligence, e.g. can the client actually pay them, and how can you answer that question if you have no idea and agreement on project duration?!), their business stands to suffer losses. This has nothing to do with predicting success -- it has to do with contractual obligations and legal liability. They get to charge higher rates than (1) because of this additional skill required, risks involved and the associated differences in supply.

If you are a non-technical entrepreneur with no idea how to run technical projects and you seek out a warm body, you will get burned because that is not what you need (and this is part of what the linked article is about).

If you are a warm body who accepts such work - just selling hours and not a plan, a schedule and budget, yes I believe you are unethical because you are not ultimately providing what somebody expects, despite knowing their expectations, and that's the definition of misrepresentation (it's like selling somebody a car without a working engine and not stating that anywhere).

If you explain to them the risks, give them a plan that you honestly believe you can meet, and they still want to go ahead, shrug that's fine. But if you just say "yah I'll build it" knowing full well it's not going to be useful, or worse you're too naive to know how to manage projects but you're selling yourself as a professional developer that'll deliver, you're unethical.

[JoeAltmaier]

I've been #2, and always explained the risks, options and my estimate of success. I Always recommended the MVP approach. I felt fine about what I did.

Warm bodies don't often choose their projects. Its hard to call them unethical when they're helpless to choose.

And its really hard to 'know full well its not going to be useful', isn't it?

[grepherder]

Ditto, I too think this discussion is a bit tired. It's a free market, if someone agrees to do something for a certain pay, let them. Obviously, in most cases, you are going to get more commitment and possibly even higher quality work from said person as a co-founder. It all depends on what you need. There are thousands of examples of successful projects with hired work (I can speak for the European market), just not so many on the web, but I would guess the lack of success in that area correlates with other factors.

[kappaknight]

You sound like a mercenary, which is fine for those without viable options.

However, the article is saying the chances of success is higher if you find someone who also believes in the vision.

[JoshTriplett]

The approach you suggest works fine in the short term: most of your customers will fail, but only after paying you, and there's a line of suckers behind them.

However, in the long term, if you help a customer thrive by helping them understand what they really need, you might make a bit less off that customer right away, but you'll have a customer for life, and many more where that came from via word of mouth.

[fleitz]

I don't think they are suckers, I just have no idea which will succeed and which will fail.

I always try to leverage my expertise to help them but at the end of the day the customer is always right.