Hacker News Reader

I'm confused by the angry tone. I thought investors are paying entrepreneurs to give it their all and earnestly take big calculated risks. Both the founders and investors are buying an out-the-money call option on success, so maximizing volatility seems ideal?

Would investors rather have a 1% chance of Google or a 70% chance of steady single digit returns (and total loss otherwise)?

View on HN

One of the points is that you often need to adjust (sometimes significantly) before you've given the business a chance to succeed. Some fail fast practitioners may see market resistance as disproving the idea, instead of valuable feedback to incorporate into product adjustments.

I don't understand it either. If I were an investor I would rather the startup found out after 3 months and 50,000 that the idea didn't work, than after 3 years and 500,000 (or more).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com