Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

But what if the failure rate for those who do try is 99%? Trying isn't always zero-risk... I wonder if ambition could be subject to a cost/benefit analysis, haha. At some point I suppose you just have to let go of the numbers.



If you are looking for reasons to not try, you're going to find an endless supply of them.

I've done a lot of things that people relentlessly told me I had no chance of accomplishing.


You are either...

1. Extraordinary, and able to achieve what others cannot. 2. Lucky, and by chance successful in an area where success is hard to find. 3. Being told that you have no chance of accomplishing things that are actually not very hard. 4. A living example of how anybody can do that which they set their mind to.

If you're 1, then other people can't use your experience as a guideline. If you're 2, then people can't use your experience as a guideline. If you're 3, then people can't use your experience as a guideline.

If you think you're 4, then you're either 1, 2, or 3, and just don't realize it yet.


I've done a lot of things that people relentlessly told me I had no chance of accomplishing.

Same here. I just use the commentary from the naysayers as "fuel for the fire", if you will.

On that note... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-qhWahjOgY


> Trying isn't always zero-risk

Trying is never zero-risk but not trying is always 100% risk of failure.

The bigger the risk the bigger the reward usually, that's how capitalism works.

Work a 9-to-5 at a safe company, make a nice salary, have little risk

Work a 9-to-7 at a startup, make less money but have equity, have more risk of the company going under but have a bigger shot at reward

Start your own company, have no salary but 100% equity, risk being homeless, reward being a billionaire

Every choice you make is a risk-reward calculation and you have to decide what's important to you and whether it's worth risking for a bigger reward.


Well first you are correct in that there is a psychological cost of failure for sure. Which is why it's harder for some people to cold call than others.

I've found that since the advent of email (and before that postal mail) it's much easier though. You fire off an email and you forget it. If something happens it happens. So you don't really feel the rejection.

By the way separately some of the best cold calling salesman are people who can't register or feel the annoyance or discomfort of those they are pitching. People who are able to feel this (either visually or by vocal tone) have a much much harder time overcoming the negative feedback. (Source: This is based on anecdote and observation over many years in business.)


> ...there is a psychological cost of failure for sure.

I think this is one of the biggest challenges for entrepreneurs. Winston Churchill once said "Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." A lot of people, however, can only tolerate so much failure. At some point, failure wears them down and they lose the will to keep trying.


A failure rate of 99% is a great value

So, if you try 10 times, your chance of never succeeding is around 90%. Or, saying it another way, the chance of succeeding, at least once, is 10%


What's the cost/benefit breakdown of not taking the risk?


I don't really understand how we've ended up at this line of argument. There is no significant risk to talking shit at a bar. Other than the fact that being in the bar in the first place is generally a good way to avoid opportunities.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: