[chollida1]

I don't know Sam, but I really like this experiment he's doing with writing. Lot's of decent articles being written a a high speed.

It's almost like he's trying to replicate Paul Graham circa 2004- 2008.

I haven't seen an article yet that breaks any new ground, ie he's still looking for his "blub paradox" article, but all his articles generate discussion.

Just look at his article on AI from yesterday. It didn't really break any new ground in the AI conversation and it got 260+ comments.

[lawnchair_larry]

Except unlike PG, he hasn't really established authority on what he is writing about (other than perhaps a confusing endorsement from PG). What are Sam's big hits?

Edit: That sounds meaner than intended, but it's actually an honest question. How does this guy share a top 5 list spot with Jobs, Larry, and Sergey? How do we know we should take him at his word when he didn't learn these things be being successful doing them? I feel like I'm missing something.

[cududa]

He's an advisor at YC and an advisor at tons of other successful startups. Tons of successful entrepreneurs have benefitted from his advice and take what he has to say very seriously.

[devfeed]

But PG wasn't an established authority back when PG was writing fast. I remember reading PG in 2006, and you'd read lots of snarks on the tech forums of the time (Slashdot, Digg): who is this guy, and why should we listen to this bored washed up multi-millionaire who sold his startup to Yahoo? He hasn't done anything of note in the past 10 years! (They said the same thing about Philip Greenspun too, who was also writing at a faster clip back then).

Look, at the end of the day, "established authority" is only loosely correlated with worthwhile meaning. At some point you're going to have to move past the author and evaluate the words on the page on their own merit.

[lawnchair_larry]

> At some point you're going to have to move past the author and evaluate the words on the page on their own merit.

For this type of writing, you can't. You don't have the experience or the data to judge anything. That's just how expert advice works. It's not falsifiable to anyone that would be learning from it, so that's why the credentials are important.

[lmg643]

Production counts - "80% of success is showing up."

I particularly liked the opener: "Without thinking much I said ________, but having thought about that a bit more, I think it’s probably right."

[michaelochurch]

I like most of what SA has to say, but I think PG is coaching him in response to, well, me.

I saw this Quora comment last night and it reaffirmed my suspicion: http://www.quora.com/Hacker-News/Why-does-Paul-Graham-have-a...

People respond more to anecdotes than hard data. PG did, as the Quora comment mentions, give the world an anecdote of a good guy winning. After 2001, there was a huge morale crisis (because of the same ills as what we see now-- unqualified idiots raising huge sums of money, carpetbaggers from finance swooping in and calling all the shots) in the Valley, and it took Paul Graham to raise the banner and reconvince people that what was happening out there was right.

A "good guy winning" story, in a society on the cusp of awareness of its own corruption-- that is, facing a morale crisis-- can be really powerful in bringing back hope. However, for each PG, there are lots of good guys who lose at that game, but I'm one of the few who spoke out and called it for what it was. Most people value their own success more. I value truth. I don't want anyone else to fall into the career-damaging trap of the VC-funded startup game. It's just not for our generation.

With PG's account and my account, the impression that all this makes is that, yes, 15 years ago (PG's time) the Valley may have been a meritocracy, but now (for my generation) it's just another corporate ladder-- and an inferior one to that of finance.

In order to prop up faith in the Valley's claims of meritocracy, PG needs a "good guy winning" from our generation, and someone who can write well and see the big picture. He needs that person badly, and I think Sam Altman is really good in the role.