Uncrunched

jwz commented [1] on a previous discussion of his diary after Arrington linked to it claiming "rah rah rah startups are awesome keep busting your ass [to make me rich] [some editorial liberties taken]" [2]. This is the bit that stuck with me

I did make a bunch of money by winning the Netscape Startup Lottery, it's
true. So did most of the early engineers. But the people who made 100x as
much as the engineers did? I can tell you for a fact that none of them slept
under their desk. If you look at a list of financially successful people
from the software industry, I'll bet you get a very different view of what
kind of sleep habits and office hours are successful than the one presented
here.

It's well worth thinking about, particularly given the endless whining on here / in the industry that engineers aren't leaping at the chance to give up $40k or $50k a year in salary for a couple basis points in almost-certainly-never-gonna-be-worth-anything options. Therefore there's an engineering shortage that must urgently be addressed at the highest levels of government, which solution must necessarily include open immigration for engineers.

[1] https://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-sell-a-con/

[2] http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/

I don't think these two incidents are comparable.

Jamie's diary page (src: http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html ) says at the top that the excerpts might serve as a cautionary tale about working in a startup (and Arrington also says in his infamous article (src: http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/ ) that people who think they are working too hard or sacrificing too much should quit their startup), but aside from that it's a just a bunch of entries from a personal diary, not a rant with an overarching message or thesis statement. Arrington used the diary entries as evidence that the startup experience was hard in 1994, but (correct me if I'm wrong) he never modified jwz's quotes or tried to make it appear that jwz had an opinion that he didn't have.

You're right... but start-up culture glorifies the long hours and epic all-nighters[1], that to do otherwise would have you tarred a slacker[2].

[1] "One of the most pervasive myths of startup life is that it has to be all consuming. That unless you can give your business all your thoughts and hours, you don’t deserve success. You are unworthy of the startup call. This myth neatly identifies those fit for mission: Young, without obligations, and few if any extra-curricular interests. The perfect cannon fodder for 10:1 VC long shots." http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3106-all-or-something

[2] "Startups Are Hard. So Work More, Cry Less, And Quit All The Whining" http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/

This, to me, is the best counterpoint I've read to Michael Arrington's rant from a few months back on how startup folk need to work harder and stop crying.

http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/

Arrington is a romantic, and he believes passionately in the romantic mythos of the startup world. That's what drew him to the valley to start TechCrunch in the first place. And that view of the world is warped as hell.

The key is you've just got to match the level of effort you're willing to give to the level of effort required to achieve the goal you've set out for yourself. Not all goals -- including entrepreneurial goals -- require a 120 hour a week personal commitment to succeed.

Why didn't anyone link to this LNKD profile?

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/aniruddha-%22ajit%22-nazre/1/230/439

or this

http://www.wellington-partners.com/wp/ajit_nazre.html

Same person right?

This married dude just harassing co-workers left and right.
How gross.

The way you phrase your argument seems to paint your intentions, less than objective.

Workplace affairs aside, what is the indubitable proof to suggest that these things transpired owing to malice, on his part?

Has he testified, yet?

This reminds me of the Michael Arrington case [1], of people rushing to judgments.

[1]

http://uncrunched.com/2013/04/11/jennifer-allen-false-defamatory/

http://uncrunched.com/2014/06/24/fifteen-months-later/

Worth reading Arrington's post:
http://uncrunched.com/2011/10/28/oh-shit-im-a-racist/

CNN doesn't pass the smell test. Media in the USA is all at the tabloid level these days, and the whole purpose of covering NewMe (as opposed to a non-racially oriented incubator) is to be able to pay the race card. That's why Arrington was sandbagged.

It's kind of a sad statement about the state of news media that things like Startup School, Y-Combinator, etc, are not worthy of this kind of coverage in their own right. We've had a revolution in starting businesses in the last 10 years.

But, there's no conflict in a radically better way of making the world a better place.

However, charges of racism? Ratings gold, right?