> Not only do start-ups normally not have 4-5 years, but they don't even try to solve hard problems - they mostly just try to solve some trivial bullshit to exploit a legal loophole or insert themselves as middlemen in a corporate/legal swamp.
I don't really agree with that, the time horizon on a successful startup, one that's acquired or goes public, is 7-10 years. I also don't agree with the class of problems. Like everything there's tiers. C tier player get's a C tier company with C tier problems. Naturally there's more C tier people than A tier, but that's not an indictment specific or by any stretch unique to startups.
Edit: Honestly, the prevalence of easy capital means bullshit like you say stands out more but I'm not sure if a lot of companies like that are the winning bet for another like Google or whatever. They're over pronounced for sure but the moment venture capital stops having so much money floating around they'll die out imo. It does mean you have to do a little more work to find the interesting ones though.
I thought about it a bit more - I was unfair to start-ups. It's not that start-ups largely solve trivial problems - it's that humans largely solve trivial problems.
There are factors that make start-ups more likely to solve trivial problems vs say, a research institute, but it almost doesn't matter in the scheme of things.
There are exceptions - they come once every few decades, per industry, give or take. Then the millions of regular people take it and do what they can't help but do :)
Yes I think I now largely agree with you. Most humans do mundane work and solve trivial problems. It's how the system keeps working though. If that stopped we'd be too busy sifting through the wreckage to produce the few exceptions where most of our value (not necessarily monetary) comes from.
I don't really agree with that, the time horizon on a successful startup, one that's acquired or goes public, is 7-10 years. I also don't agree with the class of problems. Like everything there's tiers. C tier player get's a C tier company with C tier problems. Naturally there's more C tier people than A tier, but that's not an indictment specific or by any stretch unique to startups.
Edit: Honestly, the prevalence of easy capital means bullshit like you say stands out more but I'm not sure if a lot of companies like that are the winning bet for another like Google or whatever. They're over pronounced for sure but the moment venture capital stops having so much money floating around they'll die out imo. It does mean you have to do a little more work to find the interesting ones though.