trueneverland

Would reusable rockets count. Technically it's an extension of rockets but it's still a new invention on its own

Just wanted to note I get its an analogy. I also remember that being said somewhere too. But funny enough, most won't take 20. They'll do the full 30 or more. LOL

Clickable:

https://github.com/twcamper/sicp-kindle

https://github.com/downloads/danchoi/kindlefodder/jquery_fun...

https://github.com/downloads/danchoi/kindlefodder/rails-guid...

https://github.com/downloads/danchoi/kindlefodder/unix.2012-...

http://git-scm.com/2010/06/06/pro-git-on-kindle.html

https://github.com/zacharyscott/whys-poignant-guide-for-kind...

https://github.com/visionmedia/masteringnode

https://github.s3.amazonaws.com/media/progit.epub [Can be converted to mobi]

https://github.com/igstan/learn-you-some-erlang-kindle

https://github.com/igstan/learn-you-a-haskell-kindle

https://github.com/turesheim/Guide_to_Fortran77

https://github.com/propella/DesignPrinciplesBehindSmalltalk

Code they've written. Review and evaluate.

I think you read my comment wrong then. I never undervalued risk in any way. I agree its one of the most important factors. But I think the type of risk is more important than what you lose out on as opposed to the other guy.

I think doing a startup is risky for a lot of people in general. Comparing risk in the manner the OP did is poor. I think to succeed you have to have a certain level of risk tolerance. There are a lot more things to consider and compare than who risks more financially or in opportunity cost. Getting into a startup requires more commitment than that in my personal opinion.

Now if you're talking about risk appetite in doing things and jumping into a startup, then I'd agree risk is a factor worth taking note of.

Different people will have a different of opinion on this. As full disclosure, I am NOT a fan of 50/50 splits in general and have had my fair share of businesses and startups.

Here is my take:

1. Your first bullet point is irrelevant. You not having a job doesn't mean you couldn't get a job to lower risk if thats the way you think (although thats not a good way to think at all). Him having a job doesn't mean much. What matters is what you each bring to the table and what you contribute. If your argument was more base on time commitment rather than risk, I'd agree.

2. I HIGHLY disagree with this argument. A lot of HN love to downplay the non-technical founder (with good reasons) but a valuable non-technical founder who have the skills (which many who start out don't) is worth their weight in gold as well. The non-technical argument here is more of a bias use case than a fair assessment of what each is bringing to the table and how that will contribute towards the startup.

3. This one is valid. As someone else noted, check for liabilities regarding this. The fact that you are going to be putting in more time makes it somewhat valid that the split should not be 50/50 starting out. Unless he is investing some money and willing to put in equal time, among other things, it would be very difficult to justify a 50/50 partnership. That said, if you value and trust him, and he does bring the goods as you say (not just perceived), then you will need to figure out fair compensation otherwise.

TL;DR 50/50 probably doesn't make sense in this case but some of the arguments presented are invalid in my personal opinion.

And how many active accounts...

My first startup started in mid-2000s. For identity reasons, I'm not going to list the name here (I prefer to stay anonymous), but it wasn't a typical silicon valley style startup. What I mean by that specifically was while we were based in San Francisco, majority of the bay area never even knew we existed.

Back then, Techcrunch wasn't very well known and I am not sure HN even existed. Majority of people were not blogging yet and we never thought about getting press. Perhaps because of the way things are now, and there is a lot of information overload, there is a lot of subconscious influence on how people perceive things and thus have a specific mindset when it comes to building a startup.

For better or for worse, we were not originally from this area and we didn't get exposed to any of the valley related stuff (total ignorance you could say) and because of that, we took a very different route even though we were building a tech startup.

We didn't really have a formal launch day per say (if people signed up during the beta stages, we never denied anyone from using the product or having to wait for an invite). We didn't even originally intend the idea to be a startup. It was an idea built out of necessity and something we showed off to our friends who got interested in using the product. It wasn't until some time later that the idea of making a company out of it (note the word company vs the word startup) came across our mind. When it became clear we wanted to build a company around the product, we got our small group of friends to help bring in more people who had a common interest in the product as well as reaching out to total strangers online wherever we could finding anyone who would be interested.

We spent countless hours and weeks just messaging random people online from anywhere and we probably got somewhere between 200-300 people using the product (I don't remember exact count, its been awhile). And while the rest of the world didn't even know we existed, we pretty much went through iterations to improve the product base on feedback through this group. This part was also accidental. This was before we ever moved to the bay or even heard of the term lean startup. None of that existed in our world at the time. Turns out this was the best way to do things.

This accident formed our "beta" group although it was never really intended to be such and when it was much better (the product), we started to reach out to people in the industry who had influence to check out our product. This got the ball rolling for what I guess could be considered a public launch but there was definitely no set definitive idea around what a launch day was. We began attending industry events and doing everything we could to spread the word while working on the product around the clock and slowly but surely the user base grew.

Two things to note from this. The first is I don't know how this compares to how others did things back then. The second is this may or may not be the fastest way to grow but our product was not a consumer facing product to begin with and this was before social and sharing became a de facto and things drastically changed on how fast you can acquire users today vs then. I am only answering this base on my first startup since this is what you were asking in reference to. Things are slightly different albeit still the same in a lot of ways. Hopefully it helps in some way.

This. The trackpad is godly. I haven't seen a PC equivalent.

I've always viewed Forrst more designer than programmer

Thanks, I'll check that site out!

The problem is I don't know how to use photoshop lol. I prefer visual tutorials but youtube vids are severely lacking. The ones I find, are very photo centric as opposed to website design centric. Alternatively a good photoshop book for web design would be nice but I haven't come by one that is specific enough on learning photoshop

I've been trying to get into design, particularly starting with photoshop... But a ton of the material are geared towards photography editing. The few tutorials I was able to find that were web related where difficult to follow. What would you suggest as a good starting point from someone who doesn't know how to use photoshop (or any other tools) at all, that would be more relevant to web design.

I did find some website tutorials online but I'm not sure they are helpful or maybe its just I'm not getting it.

This sound awful to say but I can't help you but would love to pick your brain on design anyway if you're open to it. Particularly since I have no background on the stuff you're looking for.

First thing that came to my mind was someone has too much time on their hands...

YC probably prefers they help you with the process vs you doing it yourself. The problem is most people do it incorrectly and shoot themselves in the foot. Not to mention it can be a costly thing to fix. If you must do it, as PG says, do it properly. I recommend finding an attorney who is familiar with startups to do it right. Some attorneys can mess you up to.

Sounds like you didn't even bother reading my comment. I am well aware Disqus can allow anonymous commenting as an option. But that doesn't clearly address what I stated.

This could be problematic as I think California has some law about volunteer work can not be tied to profit related work within a company. Might recall this incorrectly but double check

I prefer name and comment, no registration system

You assume every site uses either of those two. The reason I made the comment I made is because I keep running into unique systems

I really hate any commenting system that requires me to register. I don't want to have dozens of accounts just because of all these various systems for commenting.

If I had to guess, I would guess because PG and YC does not want to allocate too much resources to building it out as well as YC. They still add features, but I think I read somewhere before that every resource they spend on developing HN is resource and time that could be spent doing something else (opportunity cost). So they probably do the minimum needed and maybe a few features here and there from time to time and scaling fixes but overall probably not going to push huge changes. It's basically Craigslist.

Something that would actually allow Quicktime vids to fullscreen so I don't have to use Safari to fix this problem

This was posted less than 2 months ago: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4123995

You guys should have had vesting in place. I am going to guess you didn't. Vesting is designed to protect founders for this very reason. Typical vesting is usually 4 years to earn the full 100% of their vested shares with a 1 year cliff.

So to break this down, lets PRETEND (i.e. example scenario) you guys started out as 50/50 partners. The way vesting would have worked would be, for simplicity sakes, let says there are exactly 100 shares and that suppose you both had vested the full term (4 years) and stuck it out, you both would have 50 shares each.

Typically if anyone leaves sooner, the way it works is, if you leave before the first year (hence 1 year cliff), you leave with zero equity. At the 1 year mark, you earn 25% of your vested stock (1 year of 4 year vesting period). That means 12.5 shares of stock (1/4th of your 50 shares). From that moment on, for the remaining 3 years, shares would vest 1/36th of the remaining share for each month that goes by.

Thus at the end of the 4 years, you are fully vested. In this case, I would treat this the same. You would need to do a termination agreement (you should talk to your attorney about this), give him any vested shares he would have earned or if he is leaving before he's been there for a year, and give him some additional compensation for the termination agreement you think is fair (not stock; usually cash). In either case, you are recommended to do a termination payout whether he gets stock or not.

Talk to an attorney!

If you are in learning mode, read several books on the same subject/language/whatever. Skim the similar points and look for the differences. Test. Don't just assume a singular point of reference is going to help you learn. More importantly, like with any information, take everything with a grain of salt, INCLUDING everything you find online, google results, searches, and answers here.

Funny but I was just thinking about scraping the site for data on what users were using 2 days ago. Dropped the idea when I didn't care

From personal experience, all I can say is absolute trust and strong communication from your cofounder is absolute. You guys lack that and having to address it at all is already a red flag in my book. Given that you brought it up and things still haven't improved, its time to shut down or talk to an attorney to sign him off. Clearly this will not go well in the long run if things don't change.

1. If you already addressed this with him and he's not communicating, its over already. And the way he's acting is not going to be good moving forward. Why is he working for the VCs?

2. Another reg flag for me is if there is one thing I hate more than anything is people who purposely lie about what they know or what they can do for no apparent reason. If he can't code, he can't code. Simple as that.