[michaelochurch]

Well, first of all I never claimed to be a top-0.0001% programmer. Possibly plain-old top-1% if we interpret programmer literally.

If a flat, open-allocation model really is the best way to run a startup, you might be on to something huge here.

Actually, that's a misconception. Startups tend to need a constrained open allocation: yes, everyone can work on anything important to the company, but the latter must be defined conservatively to ensure focus. As firms get larger, the open/closed allocation decision becomes more formalized and there's a clear right vs. wrong way to make that call.

I am certainly considering, for the long term, that I'll probably be starting a company at some point. It might not happen now, it may not even happen this decade, but I probably will reach a point where that's the best next step.

[fearless]

I think you should definitely consider doing this sooner rather than later. From reading your comments, it looks like you make the claim that: 1. Most startups are horribly mismanaged and are run incompetently by VCs/MBAs. 2. You have a radically different strategy for running a startup that makes engineers significantly more effective.

If so, this represents a tremendous opportunity for you. A startup run on your model, if your assumptions are correct, would have a massive - possibly several orders of magnitude - competitive advantage, and could have a very meaningful impact on the business world as a whole.

At the very least, I'd be curious to see a startup bring you in for management consulting and see how they do in a few years.

Anyway, kudos for taking the long view. It's rare to see people plan things many years or decades out in our social media addled age.