Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Hmm... if A players hire A players, B players hire C players, and C players hire losers, how could B players ever get hired?

Do the people who think up these simplistic axioms ever bother to think them through?

Far33d's comment about the "echo chamber" effect is well-stated. Look into why IBM missed the minicomputer boom, and why DEC missed the microcomputer boom.

Sam_Odio also has a valid point. Selecting the choice that offends the fewest people is what gives us so many buildings with walls and carpet that are a bland beige/white/gray color.

The real issue here is distinguishing between Joe 1, who's controversial because he's a bloody genius, and Joe 2, who's controversial because he's an asshole. This is further complicated by the fact that legitimate geniuses aren't always the easiest people with whom to get along. If you take this guy's advice, you'll wind up with Joe 3, who may be a good worker bee, but probably isn't ever going to do anything great.



> Hmm... if A players hire A players, B players hire C players, and C players hire losers, how could B players ever get hired?

For the win!

You've just uncovered the investor version of "you can't handle the truth!"

"Colonel, I have just one more question before I call Airman O'Malley and Airman Perez: If you gave an order that Santiago wasn't to be touched, and your orders are always followed, then why would he be in danger, why would it be necessary to transfer him off the base?"

...

"No sir. You made it clear just a moment ago that your men never take matters into their own hands. Your men follow orders or people die. So Santiago shouldn't have been in any danger at all, should he have, Colonel?"


B players get hired when A players make mistakes. B players also start the company sometimes. Look at Larry Ellison.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: