Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChuckMcM | Hacker News Reader

I really dislike this sort of journalism. Theranos was founded by a 19 year old too. That one didn't work out so well. Was it because the founder was so young? The board so oblivious? (a bit of both if you read the book)

What does it really matter how "old" the founder is, does the business have a workable business plan? Can it be profitable? Do people pay enough money for its goods and services to return a net income? Those are interesting questions. That it was started by a teenager is not, to my way of thinking, particularly relevant.

I'd much prefer that the article focus on these things which helps us understand the value that they bring to the market and what makes them unique.

View on HN

Incidentally this frame is what got the most upvotes, compared to more neutral framing of the new valuation.

[3 points] Scale AI (YC S16) raises $100M at $1B+ valuation to go beyond AI data labeling: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20615657

[11 points] Scale (YC S16) Raises $100M from Accel and Founders Fund at $1B Valuation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20614672

We merged this thread into the latter, which was posted earlier and has the less baity title.

Agreed. I don't object to company or founder exposés such as these, but I do find the article's focus on the founders' age to be misplaced and distasteful. I also think that these kinds of breathless adorations of the latest "wunderkind" to contribute to the widespread perception/reality of ageism within the industry.

I understand it makes for a more click-attracting title, but imagine if the title was "Silicon Valley's Latest Unicorn Is Run By an Asian" - it sounds offensive, at least to me. Preferably the articles would focus on something other than a protected class.

Note that age is not technically a protected class, only "advanced age", defined as 40+, but I personally think that making unbounded age a protected class would be beneficial for everyone. Refusing to hire someone because they're "too young" is equally as offensive as refusing because they're "too old".

Startup business is show business, hence obsession with youthfulness and cheap drama.

Customers flock to fame, press and investors do as well - they “know” where the customers will be so they go there, increasing the chances of success in a positive feedback loop. That’s how show business works.

San Francisco is the new Hollywood, basically.

I think it depends. If the age is being used to promote ageism, then this is not good. If however, the age is used to encourage young people to start businesses, that's positive. So... context and tone?

The age is actually testament to how easy it is to get to 1B$ valuation with no need for deep software experience.

This is in general not a good sign for the company or for the VC.

I think we have to just come to terms with the reality that ad-dependent journalism is inherently click-baity. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional or lying.

> I'd much prefer that the article focus on these things which helps us understand the value that they bring to the market and what makes them unique.

Me too. The era of lightweight clickbait headlines can't end soon enough.

I've come up with much dumber business plans at 30 than many originated by 22-yr-olds.

Harshness is in order---regarding the business plan. But the age is a total red herring.

Welcome to the bubble.

Don't fret, it is not likely to last much longer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com