Just Do It: Move to Silicon Valley | Hacker News Reader

Just Do It: Move to Silicon Valley

jakek.posterous.com

132 pointsjakek126 comments

Moving to Silicon Valley definitely gets you closer to a pool of tech startup minded people and the venture capitalists that feed them in the same way that moving to Los Angeles helps you start your acting career. But I'm sure that there are quite a few wannabes up north who never moved beyond the dreaming phase, just like there are quite a few waiters here in Los Angeles waiting for their big break.

A tech startup anywhere needs smart founders and lots of determination. You need more than just a zip code to make it in the startup world. I think the location only helps if the other pieces are already in place before you make the move.

That's a great analogy. If I had a nickel for every goof with a "hot startup idea" in the valley, I'd be richer than most of the people who have hot startups.

I've never lived in LA, but living in San Francisco feels like the technology version of every hard-luck-actor tale I've read of Hollywood. It's so easy to run across the modern equivalent of a waiter with a script (a hacker with a business plan), that it's actually disconcerting to go to valley conferences or social events. You're usually bombarded by so many people who want something -- funding, partners, customers, external validation -- that you tend to shut them all out.

Yeah, I've seen that phenomena too - there are an awful lot of people that think moving to Silicon Valley will magically make their startup successful, instead of it just being one of the first steps in a long, long journey.

The nice thing about SV is that there are folks here that actually work on tough technical problems and have the skill to match - Googlers, Yahooglers, Microsofties, researchers at Stanford and Berkeley, etc. Not to mention all the repeat entrepreneurs who have money to invest and are looking for their second big idea. It can sometimes be hard to convince these people to found a startup (well, hard to convince the tech company employees...the repeat entrepreneurs will jump on anything with a reasonable chance of success), but there's talent here.

I've lived in LA all my life, and I've seen more than my fair share of aspiring actors. I'm sure that their chances of making it big are better here than they are in Kansas, but not by much if all you have going for you is the fact that you live in LA. I'm sure the same rules apply for country singers in Nashville, or dancers in New York. It might actually benefit startup founders to stay out of an environment like the one you described!

I'm sure that their chances of making it big are better here than they are in Kansas, but not by much if all you have going for you is the fact that you live in LA.

Adding to that: if the only difference between your success and failure is your location - your probability of success to begin with is probably slim. Success is a mindset, not a zip code.

But what if you're a very talented actor? I'd be surprised if, in that case, LA and NY don't provide a significant incremental advantage.

It is important to be around people who want badly to succeed, not people who have dreams but no work ethic. There are more of the latter than the former, in both startups AND acting.

Also keep in mind that actors move to LA because there is WORK in LA, not because there are other actors! To get acting gigs, zip code DOES matter :)

You're absolutely right, being in silicon valley does not, by itself, equal success. There are other factors that are far more important and there is no silver bullet. That's why there are tons of examples of great startups all over the world, including ones based right in my hometown.

So, if you personally have no desire to move here and are happy with your startup right where it is, then you should stay where you are.

All that being said, if deep down you've got the feeling that the valley might be the place for you, you see that you're not moving forward on your startup as fast as you'd like, or you haven't yet found the right people to work with, then it's a move I highly recommend.

I guess it just depends on which circle or places you usually hang around with. Either you're in LA, NY, Montreal, or elsewhere; you can still run a sustainable startup with the right timing and resources.

Still, I'd rather stay in Silicon Valley for a number of reasons:

1) High concentration & influx of venture capitalists, startup founders, incubators and advisors 2) Sun 3) Sun

Don't get me wrong, places like New York are going strong true. Foursquare, Vimeo... and where do I get my morning coffee? Fred Wilson's AVC.com blog. I moved back to SV from DC because I'm used to the peninsula and I really know this is where I want to be if I run a startup. But it is actually up to you if you want to run it in New York, Montreal, London, or Berlin. Timing can be everything sometimes.

Women? Yeah, New York has plenty. But after reading Neil Strauss's "The Game", I think you can create an opportunity of meeting the right girl for you out of every setting. (Disclaimer: I don't go to night clubs often these days. I go to Club Startup)

Try Boulder. Startup scene. Major university. Lots of sun like SV. But... from what I can tell, lots more women.

Yeap. TechStars, then snowboarding bliss.

I struggle with this question myself a lot. I'm in LA currently and instead of conversations about web startups in cafes - I hear managers talking to talent and hot new ideas for movie scripts.. Pretty cool but doesn't help with a web startup.

The one major complaint I continue to hear about SV from my male friends is the severe lack of eligible females there. Being from the east coast and now living in LA I might find it hard to live in place where I'm surrounded by predominantly male engineers 24/7 who are only talking about tech. I used to work as an engineer at Cisco and I remember that feeling. It wasn't a good one.

"The one major complaint I continue to hear about SV from my male friends is the severe lack of eligible females there. Being from the east coast and living currently in LA I might find it hard to live in place where I'm surrounded by predominantly male engineers 24/7 who are only talking about tech. I used to work at Cisco and I remember that feeling. It wasn't a good one."

The valley sucks, but San Francisco is loaded with single women. You've just got to make an effort to socialize outside of tech circles (which are skewed male everywhere you go).

Also, it helps to have a level of life sophistication beyond that of the average 20-year-old hacker -- a lot of the single women here are more established, and looking for men who have evolved a bit beyond frat-house antics, or guys who survive exclusively on pizza, meat and beer. A lot of startup guys surround themselves with an entourage of unkempt 20-somethings who have no interests in life outside of computers and heavy drinking; it shouldn't be surprising that women are rare in these environments.

SF is better than Mountain View, but is not "loaded with single women" if you compare it to somewhere like NYC. It's still pretty bad.

In terms of demographics, SF is certainly not bad - it is evenly split from ages 20 to 27. It starts becoming more male at 30+ (about 10:9 M:F), but, when factoring in that SF has a large male gay population (and significantly smaller lesbian one), it should be about even for heterosexual men/women.

New York is certainly skewed female though, about 12:11 F:M for 20-30.

Sources: http://www.city-data.com/housing/houses-San-Francisco-Califo... http://www.city-data.com/housing/houses-New-York-New-York.ht...

If you're going to make that kind of comparison, the whole west coast is worse than the east coast. But for the west coast, San Francisco is quite good.

Let me be clearer: there's a lot of personal circumstance in these complaints. I know plenty of guys in the city who have no problems finding or meeting single women (and no, they're not rich, or male models, or anything unreasonable).

There are certainly places in the world where sex ratio is a problem, but if you find yourself in San Francisco and constantly surrounded by male nerds, then you're not doing enough to place yourself in a good situation. When you're working in technology, you have to make a conscious effort to get away from the nerd culture when you're not working. There are lots of women here, but you're not going to find them hanging around the guys at work.

As far as the west coast goes, SF is not bad. But a male in NYC doesn't even have to try, unless you have some sort of bizarre physical deformity. Even if you do have a bizarre physical deformity, there's probably a hipster chick in Williamsburg who would be into that.

But I would like to know where you go in SF where the gender ratio is not a problem. The only place I found that to be true was the marina, which introduces a different set of issues.

> But a male in NYC doesn't even have to try

I need to party with you, as I'm a total loser in NYC. I checked the census details on the male/female ratio here, and it's not that good. Overall, F > M. But from age 18-40 M > F. After that the number of males decline, which make the overall numbers appear favorable to men. Unless you're into post-menopausal women, it's still tough being a man in NYC.

I must be the only eligible male with a job in NYC who hasn't found a woman or something, and I'm actually considering taking a job in SF (because of the job and the culture).

I don't know if I didn't date because I was too busy, didn't care, or simply didn't know how to meet people in an unfamiliar environment. Probably all of the above.

Timr is right.. I've always struggled to meet women, and I'm now dating a psychologist.. and she tells me psychologists have the same complaint but opposite! (not enough single men!!!) Not sure if the same situation happens in San Francisco but..

Funnily, looking for the exact ratio I found this

http://www.physorg.com/news147587458.html

look for female art students !!!

This is actually not bad advice at all. There are loads of single japanese chicks at the art schools in SF.

The reason the women in SF claim there are not enough single men is that no woman really wants to date a build release engineer or an underemployed bartender, which are the two main classes of straight men in SF. Pro-tip: they usually pick the bartender.

I left SF/SV because the dating scene was so bad and I felt like my startup enforced "vow of celibacy" had gone on long enough. There are not enough women, and the women who are there do not like you. If you are married or don't care about dating, it's a great place.

I find this not to be true, and to state generalizations about SF/SV dating scene or lack thereof, is also far off from the truth.

Have you ever heard of Okcupid? I'm a tech guy, in the tech scene, working for a tech startup, and have found that if you want to find/date women, you need to be proactive about it (kind of like the old days). The city, and the surrounding bay area are full of available women, who do want to meet "you"... just need to look

If you're not social, then you wont meet anyone in this city, especially if you moved here for a job, and have little friends, or time to meet people, hence why dating sites like Okcupid are essential. If you grew up here, then it might be easier as you have a larger network of friends, acquaintances - that generally leads to more social events, etc..

Also - last time i checked, we have about an equal ratio of men to women (does not include sexual orientation)

Ah yes, OKCupid.

Here is my take on OKCupid. In SF, the real life singles scene is dominated by men. If you go to an event or a bar, there is a lopsided ratio of men to women. The women who are out, are typically insane. The cool women you want to meet are actually on OKCupid because they are tired of being surrounded by dirtbags and nerds (and insane women). So OkCupid works well for a man dating in SF, because that's where the normal, interesting, good-looking women are.

In NYC the scene is the opposite. The bars and events are overrun with attractive women. The weird trolls are the ones hanging out on OKC. Thus, if you move across country to NYC and update your OKC location, you'll start getting tons of messages from tattooed roller-derby girls who have pet snakes. The type you were tired of meeting at the bars in SF.

YMMV, I'll grant that maybe YC has inspired a generation of debonair hackers to move to SF and clean up with all the amazing local women.

Why exactly are there so many attractive women? Is it something to do with NY being popular among women, or the culture of the east coast, or the presence of Ivies, or...?

edit: To clarify my question- why are there more women in NYC? Is there a clear cause?

The explanation is quite simple: male/female ratio in NYC is ~0.9 and in Bay Area it's about 1.03 http://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/people/a_gender.html

The reasons for migration to cities are always economic. There are more jobs "for women" in NYC.

'Why?' is almost certainly industries and culture attracting young migration differently by gender. New York has more media, entertainment, fashion, art. Also, NYC has more rigid and easy-to-read hierarchies of male success -- in finance, law, big corporations, media fame -- for women looking to land conventional 'big game'.

I have never seen anybody describe the Ivy League as being known for having attractive women.

In one of John Taylor Gatto's books he brings up that Ivy League schools base part of their admissions process on the attractiveness of the applicant because they want to project a certain image. I'm not sure if this is true or not, and I can't find a citation, but it was in Weapons of Mass Instruction [1] I believe, but possibly Dumbing Us Down [2]. It was in his letter to his niece at the end of Weapons, if I recall correctly. I have also been told by a friend that is going to graduate school to an Ivy that it was part of the admissions process, though I'm not sure how she knew this (I believe told by a previous graduate).

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Weapons-Mass-Instruction-Schoolteacher... [2] http://www.amazon.com/Dumbing-Down-Curriculum-Compulsory-Sch...

NYC specifically has a large number of attractive women for the same reason LA does: a lot of industries based in the city which employ and are built on attractive women. There are people working service jobs (waitress, bartender, etc.) who really want to break into those industries, too.

In LA, it's movies and music. In NYC, it's music, modeling, fashion.

That said, I'd prefer a "6" who is super-intelligent and interesting, to a "9" with whom I have nothing in common.

Read: Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. Artists spend their whole lives on the awareness of seeing. When you fall for someone you truly see them, much like an artist does. There is more beauty in that than a roomful of 10's at a wet T-shirt contest.

I like Tyler Cowen's theory: "[the two variables are] income inequality, and the willingness of wealthier men to marry beautiful women from the lower income and social classes. Women then compete for lucrative marriage prizes." http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/11... NYC has both variables.

I live in NYC and can think of three reasons.

(1) There are a lot of colleges and non-engineering schools traditionally skew in favor of women

(2) NYC is very gay friendly

(3) The women here are exceptionally beautiful, setting the standards very high, messing up market efficiency

I bet it is a variety of factors, all adding up:

1. with all the skyscrapers, there's a very high-density need for secretaries (and their variants), which are roles that are disproportionately historically filled by women (for whatever reason -- please nobody launch into PC gender flame fest here)

2. lots of rich and/or high "status" ambitious men in suits -- draws many kinds of women like flies (not all, but many)

3. maybe also the high-density concentration of art, dance, advertising, book publishing industries -- all of which seem to disproportionately attract women rather than men

... plus many other factors. I just doubt it's one thing.

hehe. Nice reply and do agree with: "So OkCupid works well for a man dating in SF, because that's where the normal, interesting, good-looking women are." _ I think it works well for women too, as men are constantly messaging ladies more than the opposite, of course, I am one of those men. :)

... until you have kids, at which point it stops being so great.

I have friends with kids there. If you have enough money, it's still great. It only sucks if you're financially struggling or sending your kids through the SF public school lottery.

Even if you're not rich, it might not be so bad. I grew up in a state known for it's amazing public school system, and it was still a bunch of bullshit. I would have rather grown up somewhere I could have ridden my bike every day of the year and gotten college credits from one of the best community college systems in the country.

I had kids in SF.

You are either going to spend a spectacular amount of money to rent a town house in an acceptable part of San Francisco (and put up with an insane public school system), or your kids are going to grow up in a California suburb.

That's a dilemma I'm happy to avoid.

The SF public school lottery is garbage, but many of the suburbs are great.

Would rather grow up (or raise kids) in San Mateo vs. Schaumburg. YMMV.

I'm getting a kick out of the Schaumburg comments.

I lived there in the mid 90s, working in the next suburb north of there, Rolling Meadows. At least then it was a pretty soulless place and better known as Scumburg and Rolling Ghettos.

I live in a tiny village in the foothills of the Berkshires now. Last night was spent listing to the 150 year old town military band perform on the grounds of the historical society in perfect weather. My small kids ran around and played off by themselves and as I walked around I said hi to 10-20 people I know and who know me. Maybe I'm just getting old but that one simple night was worth more than anything living in SF could give me.

The uncanny resemblance that everything south of South San Francisco and east of Oakland has to Schaumburg definitely informs a lot of my opinions about the area. I lived in Santa Clara, in Soma, and in Noe Valley, for what it's worth.

And, candidly: if you're going to live in a Schaumburg, you should indeed pick Silicon Schaumburg, and not Frozen Schaumburg.

If you're going to live in a Schaumburg, you should indeed pick Silicon Schaumburg, and not Frozen Schaumburg.

That's what I'm sayin'. Citywise, I don't know enough about New Chicago to make an informed opinion. I vowed never to return in 1998, but I've heard it's become a great place.

Chicago, Portland, Austin, Seattle, Philly, DC, NYC, Boston, MSP, A2, Atlanta, Miami --- all better places to live than Silicon Schaumburg. Don't mistake this for boosterism. I love this city, but I'm motivated more by hatred of strip malls.

Disagree with Miami. Spent half year there in 2001. Miami is fucked up. Would live in regular Schaumburg before I lived in Miami again. Ok wait... maybe not. Miami is kind of cool because it is fucked up. But I was glad to get out of there. Also, I thought this was in the context of raising kids? Miami seems like the textbook example of the wrong place to raise kids...

I don't know if it's right to compare all of silicon valley suburbia to schaumburg, either. I think San Mateo is much different than Palo Alto, and both are much better than say... Fremont. The urban density in San Mateo is higher than Minneapolis, for example. I would love to talk about this all day, but need to cut myself off at this post...

Hmmm. I grew up in SF. Parents didn't have money, went through the public school system. Public schools here aren't that bad, as long as you apply yourself and get into the magnet schools.

(Still live here too. The dilemma I have now is that I hate the commute to my south bay job, but I don't want to live the city. I still think most of the peninsula is pretty damn boring.)

I turned out fine. (I think...)

Since when is doing the whole startup thing about lifestyle and dating women???

If you get it this way, you have already lost in comparison to those dedicated _only_ to the success of their startup.

They don't call it "Man Jose" for nothing.

Thanks for the laugh! :-)

I worked and lived in downtown "Man Jose" for a few years - It was always amusing going out, to say the Mission mAle House and observing the wolfpacks encircling any available female(s).

Hint: don't stray too far from larger universities. Santa Cruz is a nice gender balance. San Francisco isn't bad. Berkeley can be alright, if a bit ghetto.

Santa Cruz is still getting better, too. The gender balance has always been good, and the ratio of attractive females vs. unattractive ones has been improving.

Are you kidding? Berkeley is probably the worst of the worst.

Are there no eligible females in SV? Being a person more interested in finding a mate than the "predominantly male engineers 24/7 who are only talking about tech" wouldn't that put you at a comparative advantage to them with the females who do exist in SV?

I would think it might even be better than LA where being a developer or startup founder is not a asset in a movie fame and fortune mindset.

An idea: stay in LA and do a startup that manages/matches talent to managers. No business plan needed and doesn't need to even work past the "I can get you a deal/make you famous" intro.

When I lived in LA it seemed to impress girls if you said you "had a job", because most of those aspiring actor types don't.

"You can do a startup from anywhere.

And it's true. Except that it's mainly bullshit."

Doing perfectly well in New York City. Thank you very much.

Can we stop this silly banter?

The article mentions that there are plenty of good examples from other locations, just they believe that it gives them a great chance of success.

Then why make the point at all?

The article makes the point that being in the valley improves your odds, not that it's impossible to start a successful company outside the valley.

The article makes the point that being in the valley improves your odds

Or, in other words, the bar is lower.

Who says? Where's the scientific study?

For example, we can't launch Foursquare both in Silicon Valley and in New York City and see which has the better outcome.

we can't launch Foursquare both in Silicon Valley and in New York City and see which has the better outcome.

Well, I think the OP's point is that you aren't as likely to get as far as launch in, say, Houston than you are in SV.

The problem is that it's hard to get a quantifiable handle on the question, not only because it is hard to count startups that never got off the ground, but also because it doesn't have to be true; people just have to believe it to be true.

In other words, if everybody who wants to launch a startup moves to SV because they think they have to, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, irrespective of whether it was originally true.

The author of the origin post says - that's who. Should every view that anyone makes about anything have to be backed by a scientific study?

It seems like the main advantage to SV is finding a cofounder. If you already have one then a big part of it is gone.

I thought Foursquare did exactly that?

The negation of "you can do a startup from anywhere" is not "you can only do a startup in Silicon Valley".

It's just a tiresome argument that really doesn't need making. Find your team, build your product, and start marketing it.

Finding your team is a lot easier in the valley than anywhere else in the world.

I live in Europe and I've never met anyone who I think would make a half-decent co-founder.

In my opinion, another approach (even a recommended approach) is to incubate elsewhere and move to the valley when you have some traction. There's just too much noise there, too much "flavor of the month." Examples that fit this approach that come to mind are flickr, digg, and stumbleupon. I'm sure there's plenty more.

There's just too much noise there, too much "flavor of the month."

I often hear people make this (in my opinion rather facile) criticism of SV, but as far as I can remember I've never heard anyone give any evidence of it.

I've seen thousands of data points about this over the last 5 years, and I have seen no evidence of it. The startup ideas submitted by YC applicants from outside the Bay Area are no less likely (in fact probably more likely) to be derivative than the ones from people who live here.

There is a sideshow of nightly drunken mixers and panels and meetups and conferences and such. If you attend these you will meet hundreds of loser "CEOs" with idiotic derivative ideas. Most engineers and founders avoid this, but Digg was one of main promoters of this nonsense, which probably colored ojbyrne's experience.

Accidental downvote, sorry. It may be more SF-centric than valley-centric. My experience at digg did prompt me to network somewhat, so indirectly, you're probably correct.

I agree with this. I'm particularly exposed to seeing how founders/CEO's differ within YC and at these mixer/networking events - the generic "location based recommendation something" ideas are talked about at the latter rather than the former.

99% of everything is crap. Including startup ideas. Its hard to get statistics from personal experience.

While I would weigh pg's personal startup idea experience higher than the average person's, it is possible that, because YC deals with some of the "best of the best" in startups, his experience might suggest there are more good ideas than there really are (and the not-so-good ideas just don't apply to YC).

That assumes pg does better than average at choosing startups. I agree, he SEES a lot more than most folks.

This article, and many like it, seem to use "startup" and "consumer-facing web startup" interchangeably. If you're doing the latter, you will at least be in better company in the Bay Area. There are certainly companies that benefit from having a presence there, but there's something to be said about being outside a consumer-web echo chamber as well.

In Founders at Work, the one founder who I remember stressing the importance of location the most was Mike Lazaridis, who started his company in a smallish town an hour or two from Toronto. They have a higher market cap than all but a few of the companies Jessica interviewed.

The smallish town was/is Waterloo. The RIM HQ is close enough to the University of Waterloo campus that the two entities have sold buildings to one another. In a speech he gave once I heard him draw the analogy about putting the refinery right next to the well. He also had this interesting bit about how it was more important that the "RIM" logo on the building be more visible from the campus than the street.

Most places have to convince talent to stay whereas the Valley has it come to them, I can see it being an easier battle.

Google wasn't interviewed in Founders at Work, but they stress the importance of location starting with Noogler orientation, with periodic reminders every time you try working on a distributed team.

They stress the importance of location of team members relative to each other, or the importance of being in the valley? From my understanding, Google has a number of engineering sites outside of the Valley, even in the USA.

When you're a startup, that's pretty much one and the same.

The overall principles are that team members should be close to one another, and that you should focus very intensively on making sure you have the right team. In cities with a lower density of technical people than the valley, it's very difficult to have both a critical mass of highly-skilled people and have those people all colocated together. You occasional see successful startups like 37signals or Flickr that have smart people, but do so by having them work remotely. And you see lots of startups that attempt to get lots of local people, but sacrifice team quality as a result. You don't tend to hear much from those. But it's when you combine smart people with critical mass that you get something like Google.

They do, but I think they still keep the individual teams close to one another. I know that the team here in Pittsburgh works on only certain products, at least.

You must be thinking of RIM in Kitchener/Waterloo. When I was at University of Toronto in the early nineties, U of Waterloo was the place to go for CS or Systems Engineering if you wanted to get hired by Microsoft.

Sooo ... it's an interesting counter-example in that it kind of supports the general argument that it's good to go where the smart and savvy people are, even if that's not just SV.

Not even just "consumer-facing web startup", but "VC-funded, rapid-growth, consumer-facing web startup looking for an acquisition or IPO".

How did you overcome the visa barrier? "Just do it" is sound enough advice if you're American but you seem to be Canadian (and I'm Australian), you might as well be saying Just do it: Flap your arms and fly.

Come for three months at a time on the visa waiver program. You'll be surprised at what you can get done in that time.

OP: That is not necessarily good advice; consult with a competent immigration attorney before you do this. Most startup-y work you would do while admitted via the VWP would likely be immigration fraud - in direct violation of the terms under which the alien was admitted in via the VWP. These immigration violations incur bans, and could potentially break your dreams/career, etc.

Depends on what work takes place. It's a great opportunity to network, and write your own code.

Seems to be just fine for YCombinator too.

By the way, why is the knee-jerk reaction always to talk to a "competent attorney" for stuff like visas? I'd like to think the HN community is a pretty capable group of folks. The US government provides more than enough information online to figure out what will work best for you depending on your activities and to do it on your own. I was able to get my wife a green card completely on my own without having to consult a "competent attorney". If you are sufficiently competent, hiring a professional will save you research time but not much else.

I suspect the YCombinator usage is iffy. YCombinator don't give advice on visas, but rather suggest you speak to YC alumni who've done it. While I'm sure there are many reasons why they take that approach, I wouldn't be surprised if the legality was a big reason.

Saying that many developers both for startups and for other industries like finance do go to the US and work 2-3 months without any issue. It's not clearly allowed, but nor is it clearly disallowed.

The reason people suggest speaking to an attorney is that if you screw it up, not only will you get deported but you can be banned from re-entry not only to that country but many other countries. There's nothing like "denied entry" being stamped on your passport to get you stopped at every border crossing you cross for the rest of your life.

You don't want to talk to an attorney in this case because then it will be obvious that you are actually trying to skirt the law, rather than being a tourist.

The trick is to act like an idiot. Wear a baseball hat. The people working at the border are idiots and they will empathize with people like them. If you act like the typical annoying know-it-all computer nerd they will deny you out of spite.

By the way, why is the knee-jerk reaction always to talk to a "competent attorney" for stuff like visas?

There are dozens of guest worker visas for the United States.

Just applying for any visa to the USA is sufficient cause for the State Department to deny you future visas for the rest of your life. That includes completely sincere and honest applications. They just consider the application for any visa to be evidence of your suitability for future entrance and they keep track of tiny details forever. It doesn't matter if your life circumstances have changed.

If you've seen Brazil, you've met America's immigration bureaucracy.

A good immigration lawyer can reduce the trouble. You should never even apply for a tourist visa to the USA without asking an immigration lawyer.

I hope you're joking. Sure it's bureaucratic, but it's also straightforward. Follow the rules and there are no issues. A lawyer for a tourist visa? Please.

Yeah you can get a lot done but it's a transient state, you're leaving on a date and can't come back for months. It's really not a good way to relocate a startup, not to mention the visa violations.

In my experience it's trivial to get a TN1 visa if you are Canadian. It is tied to a specific employer, but an employer could just be an LLC set up by your friends. There is a similar visa for Australians now, the E-3.

In my experience its easy to get but not trivial. You need a lawyer first of all, or they'll deny you just for spite. Then the firm that's hiring you needs to demonstrate that it has

- employees

- an office

- revenue or funding

I've got my (successful) application right in front of me, and it has proof of all 3 of those things. Also they have to pay you the "market rate" for an engineer (presumably that's the category you would be in), and you have to have a degree in order to prove that you fit in that category.

Trivial may be the wrong word. It's easy if you fill all the requirements. In SF we had an LLC, an apartment in the mission, a lawyer to fill out the paperwork, and 8 Canadians. The canadians all did have college degrees. I honestly don't know if the border patrol even checks all of this stuff. One of the guys said it took about 20 minutes to get through. It probably depends on what border you go through. In my experience the small borders are the worst, because the border patrol are from small towns and have nothing better to do other than fuck around with you. (this is also assuming you are driving) The best driving border is BC => Washington. Flying in, the west coast seems the best.

On the other hand, I know loads of people who go from Europe, Japan and Australia to California, NYC and Hawaii simply to hang out for 3 months at a time. These are people who have no college degree or any useful skills at all. They are here to surf, snowboard, or loaf around new york. Getting into the country is not a huge problem. The threads on this topic often have a tone of excessive worrying about visas. You can easily show up in the country and hang out for a while.

"I honestly don't know if the border patrol even checks all of this stuff."

In my experience they do. I'm a Canuck who was working in Dubai, got a job in Vegas, applied for and received a TN Visa from the US Embassy in Abu Dhabi (which was a cool document bonded onto one of my passport pages). I transitted through the Vancouver airport on my way to LV. There, US Customs took one look at my TN-1, drew a line through it, noted "Cancelled without Prejudice" and denied me entry to the US to work. When I asked why the response I received was, and I quote, "Abu Dhabi don't know shit".

Well that sorta reinforces my point. They don't check it if you are denied or approved... They just deny or approve you.

Hopefully that was the last time you ever sat your foot in the us.

The bastards don't deserve us if that is how they intent to treat us.

Actually, my employer petitioned for a different visa for me, and 4 months later I was happily ensconced in LV. I've worked in many countries and bureaucracy is the same everywhere - bureaucratic.

The latter is a slightly different (and in my opinion more interesting) approach. Tourist visas are actually good for up to 6 months. So as long as you have enough money saved, you can do it that way.

How about EU citizens?

Sadly, I think EU citizens have to use the H1B visa or else one of the special-important-expert-person visas I know nothing about.

I'm from Spain. My F1 visa allows to me work for my own business for 29 months.

That's great if you happen to be studying in the US, but I suspect it's not going to work for those of us who would like to work on our startups full time.

You can work on your startup full-time on an F1 visa after you complete your studies in the US.

What about labour costs? I am currently working for a startup that has its development office in eastern germany, with a management office near Frankfurt. Although nobody explicitly said that, but the reason is simply that wages are much lower over here.

On the other hand, afaik in Sillicon Valley salaries are very high. I'm just wondering why nobody has brought that up so far.

As well as the high cost of living.

To be fair, most of Germany ain't cheap at all compared to some parts of the US.

> But after some follow-up questions, I'd soon find out they don't even read TechCrunch ...

And here I thought not reading TechCrunch was a positive attribute.

I don't think anyone would disagree that it's more difficult to find startup-oriented folks in Toronto, but you'll get better results if you look in the right places.

http://democamp.com, http://unspace.ca/innovation/pubnite, to name a few.

It's not the main point of his post, but would you really want both founders to be heavily influenced by and involved in the Hacker News echo chamber? I suspect some diversity of thinking might be more valuable.

This is an interesting article for me because I'm currently in SV and am contemplating moving away. My employees are all remote contractors, but it's time we got an office and moved together and there's just no way I could have them move here without at least doubling their salary because of the insane cost of living here. I can get office space elsewhere for half the cost and continue to pay my people what I do now if we get an office elsewhere, so that's what we're looking at.

Isn't an important factor in success of a start up to be able to run lean?

By three months, I was working with a co-founder who had also moved here to do a startup and not only reads Hacker News, but has so many karma points I would know what to do with all of them.

It is funny how important he makes the karma factor sound - like that automatically makes him a great co-founder.

I upvoted you so you'd have more karma in order to make you a better co-founder in the future. In return, I expect equity.

There are two reasons to move to Silicon Valley. Serendipity and great tech people.

If you already have the right business idea and great people there is no reason what so ever to move.

I think good VC companies is a better reason. Serendipity (by definition) can be found anywhere, and great tech people are in many, many places, plus can generally be found online.

Well that was at least my experience living there between 98 and 2002.

You don't need to have the VC right next to you. If your product/service is good you will get access to them.

In the words of a Russian dude:

Silicon Valley's greatest asset is communication. People discuss their work not trifles. Russia would benefit from this kind of environment.

http://twitter.com/KremlinRussia_E/status/16881191397

Yes, if you want to do a web 2.0 startup, then the valley is the place to be. No doubt!

Although I then think of Flickr, Plenty of Fish, Club Penguin, etc. and realize that this is not necessarily true.

How many VC-backed companies actually do well enough for the founders to get rich? Not that many - you're better off bootstrapping and then flipping the co. for a $ amount that is in the few million. And I think the Valley is the worst place to bootstrap due to the high cost of living.

And don't get me started on the high cost of getting health insurance. You're better off in Toronto.

So stop rationalizing, stop making excuses and just do it: move to Silicon Valley.

I might, if the US would stop making "immigrants are destroying our country" excuses for not having a sane immigration policy.

Only in Silicon Valley where you go in a cafe and there's a good chance you'll see other people working on their own startup, preparing to pitch to an investor or actually pitching to an investor.

Also, a lot of people has an active Twitter account that establishes their identity online.

People here just dream big. Some are delusional while some are actually on their way to making it big.

Related reads- "Israel Nation" on how Israel built something similar to the valley http://www.startupnationbook.com/

PGs essay- http://www.paulgraham.com/america.html

You think Toronto is difficult for finding engaged people to work with?, try Cork, Ireland!! ...

I have to get out there soon, even on a holiday visa ...

Depends what sort of startup you want to do. Personally I would need a multimillion dollar incentive to move there.

Here is even better advice to give (assuming you're not somewhere really extreme like the North Pole, or a place without Internet access, etc.):

Just Do It: Where You Are

because it's faster, cheaper and more efficient. Because being in Silicon Valley is not the critical ingredient, by a long shot.

It's a lot easier to do something if you have social support and cultural validation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com