Heidi Roizen

There are a few different ways this can happen. It has to do with seniority of liquidation preferences -- basically, if you recap or you exit for less than your highest valuation, who gets paid first? This blog post is a pretty great summary of what can happen: https://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/118473647305/how-to-build-a-unicor…

That cuts both ways: Your personal experiences do not dismiss the widespread experiences of a great many women. If it isn't an issue for you, then you may be a statistical outlier. It seems to be a pretty typical experience for most women -- not all, of course, but it appears to be quite common. Even female founders* sometimes talk about the degree to which they have been treated like nothing but a piece of ass by men they were trying to make deals with, an issue men do not typically have to face when they are trying to launch a business. * http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/84530650750/its-different-for-girls

VCs becoming more risk-averse, startups moving slower: https://blog.ycombinator.com/fundraising-advice-for-yc-companies http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/139377970205/dear-startups-heres-ho… --- Great paper that compares and contrasts the 3 industrial revolutions: 1) steam/railroads, 2) electricity/internal combustion engine/running water/chemicals/petroleum, 3) computers/phones/internet. Author reflects on likely future challenges and what we can do to get back to growth. http://www.nber.org/papers/w18315.pdf --- Required reading for thoughts on the state of US industry, life, liberty, GEICO insurance, etc. (mostly outside of tech): http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2015ltr.pdf --- My thoughts, in response to an article about the end of Moore's Law, and the need to design more efficient software as advances in hardware slow down: I think we're going to see this phenomenon - wringing efficiency out of what we have now - across a lot of different fields and industries in the coming years. One example is the whole IoT movement. Most of the real (industrial, medical, automotive) applications are efficiency/cost-savings focused. The central theme is connecting devices that we have now to better monitor, analyze, and utilize what we've already built. Another example that is a bit further removed from computers is the whole Uber/car sharing trend. At any given time 95% of the cars in the world are parked somewhere, not in use. Even if we could…

Thanks for saying what I had on my mind. In fact I was perusing the thread to find more voices that agree with your sentiment, spot on. The following is a comment of mine on HN from nearly an year ago. It was made in response to a post on what the author learned from Steve Jobs in matters of negotiation [a]. It stands true today as it did then. Every time the topic of empathy and its relevance to startup success or success at large comes up, I feel a strong need to revisit this comment. Sadly, I have a feeling I will be posting this for some time to come, in the foreseeable future because I think most people - if they are being genuine - seem to be under the false assumption that somehow there are ways to win in the valley or elsewhere by being anything but ruthless : -- -- -- I think every time the issue of Steve Jobs's maniacal side comes up I feel obliged to bring this up: Steve Wozniak on Steve Jobs: I was inspired by Stanford intellectuals like Jim Warren talking this way at the club. Lee Felsenstein wanted computers to help in things like the antiwar marches he'd orchestrated in Oakland and I was inspired by the fact that these machines could help stop wars. Others in the club had working models of this computer before Jobs knew it existed. He came down one week and I took him to show him the club, not the reverse. He saw it as a businessman. It as I who told Jobs the good things these machines could do for humanity,…

Previous HN discussion on a similar topic [1] from Heidi Roizen's "How to Stay Alive" [2] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11111753 [2] http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/139377970205/dear-startups-heres-ho…

That assumes that the company reaches the IPO and its value holds. And still I don't get how lower they must be priced to be comparable to a growing startup, even risk adjusted. (And consider that the IRS could have something to say...) If the company doesn't reach the IPO and get acquired, well check what liquidation preference means. Check this post to understand better how stocks in a startup works: http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/118473647305/how-to-build-a-unicorn… (it is focused on founders, but employee get the same treatment).

There has been a recurring argument about whether Steve Jobs became successful because of his behavior or despite his behavior. Few days back, I came across a compilation of facts on imgur images[1] which will immediately make you hate Steve Jobs. I also read the tumblr post 'What I Learned Negotiating With Steve Jobs'[2] which is also on the same lines. And then I read NY Times article that Jobs family has been secretly donating money to charity for past 20 years anonymously[3]. One thing is clear. The world is fascinated by Steve Jobs. [1] http://imgur.com/gallery/neGNG (couldn't verify accuracy of facts) [2] http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/80368150370/what-i-learned-negotiat… [3] http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/laurene-powell-jobs-and-anony…