Paul Graham and Y Combinator are on the cover of June's Inc Magazine(garry.posterous.com)
garry.posterous.com
Paul Graham and Y Combinator are on the cover of June's Inc Magazine
http://garry.posterous.com/paul-graham-and-y-combinator-are-on-the-cover
43 comments
Congrats PG!
And what a suave picture :-)
And what a suave picture :-)
Thanks. The guys who took those pictures were really impressive. They had a monitor displaying pictures as they were taking them, and the quality was amazing.
Reminder: children pictures by a professional photographer are really worth the money ...
(Personal experience opinion department, not even personally acquainted with one, used sparingly, not a 10k camera owner.)
(Personal experience opinion department, not even personally acquainted with one, used sparingly, not a 10k camera owner.)
Would you please not be so gutter-minded - I have two young ones, and the professional pics I have of them are worth every penny. The reminder is for those in the same boat that may want to spend the money instead of relying on their own N megapixel camera ...
"children pictures by a professional photographer are really worth the money"
That's what I kept trying to explain to the police, but they just won't listen!
That's what I kept trying to explain to the police, but they just won't listen!
Did you ask them if they were looking for funding?
By chance, do you know who the photographer was?
Williams + Hirakawa is what was given in the magazine: http://www.williamshirakawa.com/
Hopefully "Smaller Cheaper Faster" resounds in the minds of Inc's readership. Perhaps they will even take the time to read some of his essays where he expands on this perspective.
the description is pretty link bait, he didn't launch 145 companies, YC just invested in them.
Ever hear of "the face that launched a thousand ships"?
Well, she didn't push the ships off, either. In fact, she was far away and didn't even know they were launching!
Figurative speech -- which is fair to use on a magazine cover -- needn't be judged on a literal basis.
Well, she didn't push the ships off, either. In fact, she was far away and didn't even know they were launching!
Figurative speech -- which is fair to use on a magazine cover -- needn't be judged on a literal basis.
Journalism isn't meant to be epic poetry.
Headlines aren't journalism, particularly on a magazine.
Congratulations Paul. It will be nice to have a prominent page on ycombinator.com that links to all launched startups.
Edit: Found the link -- http://ycombinator.com/faq.html
It was a pretty good article, too. Too bad it's not on the website yet. It's worth picking up in dead tree form if you're interested.
I read the thing cover to cover a few days ago, and I never think to post - I think Inc set me mine early. It's a good article.
Congrats! Looks fantastic.
[deleted]
Wow Paul Graham Looks quite American. Not far off from what I imagined he looked like tho, quite a father figure :)
268 days on this site and you don't know what he looks like? btw, the buttoned-up, black-sweater look is not "American", but straight up San Francisco. The man sold out; his earlier MIT/Boston/East-Coast look was the traditional "Lisper" look (i.e. wife-beater and bandanna)
What sort of surprised me was hearing pg talk in some video. I'd been reading his stuff for years, and the voice is completely unlike what I'd imagined.
Yeah, he sounds normal doesn't he? Previously, all my contacts with "business gurus" have been hyper-agitated, super-excited sales guys, motivational speakers and the like; think Jack Welch.
I hope he won't take offense at my dissecting it, but he sounds more ... hrm, I'm not sure what the accent is... it reminds me a bit of Dave Sifry, actually. You could really hear it when he said "so" in this video, which tended to be a bit drawn out: "seeeewwww". I expected something a little bit more clipped and neutral.
Perhaps the difference is that he spends a lot of time getting his essays 'just right' whereas speaking is a bit more of an off-the-cuff affair.
Perhaps the difference is that he spends a lot of time getting his essays 'just right' whereas speaking is a bit more of an off-the-cuff affair.
[deleted]
Take http://www.flickr.com/photos/35034351734@N01/137275735/, subtract the black sweater and microphone, and you get what I call "canonical PG", in an orange polo shirt and khaki shorts.
Interesting that the longest subthread here right now, and consisting only of upvoted comments, is this one, about PG's looks and voice.
File it under that internet phenomenon of knowing a lot about someone (or at least one facet of them) without seeing or hearing them and being a bit surprised by the reality. Sort of like reading a book and then seeing the movie and being a bit disconcerted.
Very nice!
Bravo!
PG and YC need more of those cover stories to spread their message.
One step at a time :-)
And the picture really look good.
PG and YC need more of those cover stories to spread their message.
One step at a time :-)
And the picture really look good.
Please note that YC is a company, not a cult. I don't see the need to "spread the message". WTF is the "message"? Whoever has the "right stuff", will find YC or similar companies. It's that simple. PG's essays are all the marketing that YC needs. Your "fanboyism" makes you look like you're 12 years old...
Err... you could happily do without the last sentence there. Otherwise, you're right.
more mainstream publicity should be a good thing. it's not a cult, and it's not like only the "anointed ones" with the "right stuff" should know about YC. spreading the startup "message" -- that you can start your own company, instead of slaving away at a BigCo -- should be a good thing, so i'm a bit confused as to where your animosity comes from.
I remember that Marc Andreessen was on the cover of Time or Newsweek back in 1996. The internet was starting to take off, and a bunch of really young guys became instant millionaires thanks to mega-hyped IPOs. Seriosly, does one need publicity more mainstream than this? Everyone knows Gates, Ellison, Andreessen, etc.
Everyone can dream of starting a company, few can do it. I lost the count of how many smart guys I met who talked about big ideas and "thinking outside the box" (whatever that is), and being entrepreneurial and how taking risks was sooo cool... only to join a safe, cushy job at a management consulting firm as soon as they graduated. They may have the smarts, but they could not face the constant emotional terror of running a startup. Dreaming and talking is the easy part. The difficult part is to walk the walk, the commitment and persevering on the face of hardships. Some will succeed, most will fail.
I am sorry if I sound bitter. I have worked at a couple of startups which failed. You know... you think you can beat the odds, but the odds end up beating you. I get upset when I see these young kids thinking that the startup world is a "movement" and that there's preaching to be done. I used to be exactly like that, and it's a waste of time. The startup world is brutal. There's a tiny chance you will succeed, and a huge chance you'll grow old, bitter and burnt-out. Pick your battles carefully. Sometimes your dreams cost you too much.
Everyone can dream of starting a company, few can do it. I lost the count of how many smart guys I met who talked about big ideas and "thinking outside the box" (whatever that is), and being entrepreneurial and how taking risks was sooo cool... only to join a safe, cushy job at a management consulting firm as soon as they graduated. They may have the smarts, but they could not face the constant emotional terror of running a startup. Dreaming and talking is the easy part. The difficult part is to walk the walk, the commitment and persevering on the face of hardships. Some will succeed, most will fail.
I am sorry if I sound bitter. I have worked at a couple of startups which failed. You know... you think you can beat the odds, but the odds end up beating you. I get upset when I see these young kids thinking that the startup world is a "movement" and that there's preaching to be done. I used to be exactly like that, and it's a waste of time. The startup world is brutal. There's a tiny chance you will succeed, and a huge chance you'll grow old, bitter and burnt-out. Pick your battles carefully. Sometimes your dreams cost you too much.
fair enough. but in my book, success or failure, quality of life is so much higher at a startup (whether your own or not) than at a BigCo that if you're qualified, i'm honestly not sure why you wouldn't.
sure, there are perhaps only so many years of your life that you can live on "ramen noodles", but even after that, working at a funded, 20-50 person company sure beats the alternatives, and you still get to be involved in the "creation" part, even if you didn't start it.
to each his own, i suppose. after a bunch of bad experiences, i can understand how you'd be burnt out.
sure, there are perhaps only so many years of your life that you can live on "ramen noodles", but even after that, working at a funded, 20-50 person company sure beats the alternatives, and you still get to be involved in the "creation" part, even if you didn't start it.
to each his own, i suppose. after a bunch of bad experiences, i can understand how you'd be burnt out.
Relax.
I guess it depends on what you mean by "launched", but if I didn't know about this stuff already, I'd think they were trying to tell me PG literally started 145 companies as a founder.
Again this is a knock on the magazine and not PG. They're probably just trying to sell more copies.