Six principles when creating new things.

Paul Graham.

February 2008.

The violent reaction to the release of Arc ^[1] had unexpected consequences: I realized

that I have my own philosophy when creating things. Main claim

The most distinct critics have been that Arc looks

unfinished. A couple of thousand lines of macros is all I did for

few years of work? Why I did not do applied tasks?





While I was thinking about these comments, it suddenly dawned on me

how familiar were such reviews. People responded in the same way about

Viaweb ^[2] , Y Combinator and about most of my articles .





When we launched Viaweb, it only caused grins from venture capitalists.

capitalists and other "experts" in e-commerce. There were only two of us and

we worked in a regular apartment, in 1995 it didn't look so cool

like now. The project that we created, in their opinion, was not even considered

software. They understood software as

large, monolithic program under Windows, and Viaweb -

The first web application they ever saw looked like a regular website.

Their attitude towards us became dismissive when

they found out that Viaweb is not processing credit transactions

cards (we didn't actually do it in the first year

existence of the project). Processing credit card transactions for them was

the cornerstone of e-commerce. Credit card transaction processing

- it sounded serious and impressive.

')

However, oddly enough, Viaweb defeated all competitors.



When we launched Y Combinator, the reaction was almost identical. Project

seemed frivolous. Then venture investment meant millions

dollars invested in a small number of startups based on people

who have proven their worth after months of serious

business negotiations; under the conditions described in the document thickness of

thirty centimeters. Y Combinator seemed insignificant. Of course,

it is too early to say whether Y Combinator will repeat Viaweb’s success, but judging by

the number of attempts to clone our idea, many believe that we

groped something interesting.

I have no other indicator of success of my articles except

number of views, but the reaction to them has changed from that

when i was just starting out. Then the reaction of the trolls on Slashdot.org, if

translate into human language, was about the following: "Who is this guy such

to cover this topic? Such a short article written by such

in ordinary language can not say anything useful in a certain area, in

while people with advanced degrees are writing thick books on this

topic. "Now a new generation of trolls lives on

new sites, they no longer ask "Who is this guy? .."



People say about Arc the same as they said at first about

Viaweb, Y Combinator and about my articles. Why such a similarity? Like me

understood, the answer is that I have the same “handwriting” in

all four projects.



The essence of my method: I like to find (a) simple solutions (b) to no one

noticed problems (c) that really need to be solved (d)

providing solutions in as free a style as possible (e) starting with raw

version 1 (e) and constantly improving it.



When I first formulated these principles, it turned out to be practical.

recipe for generating a negative reaction. Although simple

solutions are always better; they are not as impressive as complex ones. People

by definition, they consider non-essential problems

notice Providing a solution in a simple form implies that

a person will have to break his head to understand it, and not

just experience the thrill of the dazzling view of the complex

solutions. Starting with raw version 1 implies that everything

initial efforts will be minor and incomplete.



I, of course, noticed that people can not grab a new idea from the first

times. I thought that the reason for this in most cases is

dumb mind, but now I understand that everything is not so simple. As well as

counter-investor ^[3] , everyone who follows the principles mentioned is doomed

do what the average person seems wrong.



This is the essence, as well as the counter-investor strategy. Such

strategy gives all the benefits that other people miss,

trying to look impressive. If you work on undetected

problems, then the likelihood of finding some new things is much

higher, because there are few competitors here. If you provide solutions in

free style, then you (and) do not spend the effort to make them look

impressively (b) avoid the danger of deceiving yourself and your

users. The advantage of the “start with raw version 1 and then

improve it "is that the improvement solutions from the version

the version will come from the outside, and quite unexpectedly.





In the case of Viaweb, the simple solution was to keep the software

software running on the server. An unnoticed problem was

automatic website generation: in 1995 all online stores were

designed by hand, designers, but we understood that this approach is not

give in to scaling. The most significant part of the project was

not at all processing credit card transactions, but generating a graphic

design. The mechanism for providing free-form solutions was me,

who came to meet with potential customers in jeans and

t-shirt. And the raw version 1, as I recall, was less than

10,000 lines of code, at the same time we launched the project.



The use of such a strategy goes beyond programming, startups and

writings of articles. Perhaps this technique can be used for any

creative activity. And absolutely exactly that it can be applied.

in painting: just this was done by Cezanne and

Klee .



In Y Combinator, we rely on this technique, in the sense that we

We encourage our startups to work in this style. Under your nose

There are always some new ideas, so always look out for simple

things that are not noticed by anyone - later they will seem to everyone

obvious. Pay particular attention to the problems that

got lost because of a general delusion, or because of trying to do something that only seems

impressive. Always look for the root of the problem before taking up

decision. And do not try to look coordinated, the main thing is

the product is what wins in perspective. Also, run

project as soon as possible, in this way users will let you know

that it was necessary to create in reality.



A classic example of this approach is Reddit ^[4] . When Reddit was launched,

it seemed that this project does not make sense. Not loaded with graphics

minimalistic design that did not even draw on the design. But reddit

Solved a pressing problem: show what's new. As a result, the project became

massive. Now that Reddit already exists in people's minds, it seems that

This idea was obvious. People see reddit and think that it

the founders were just lucky, but like other things like that, it’s just

seems like luck. Reddit's so hard rowed against

the currents that the current has unfolded and now he himself carries them through the water.



So when you see something like Reddit and think, “I would like to

come up with something like that ”- remember: such ideas are around you. But you

ignore them simply because they seem wrong.

---

^[1] New Lisp dialect created by Paul Graham: arclanguage.org

^[2] A web application with which you can create your online store in a few minutes in a browser window. Written in Lisp. Later was sold to Yahoo, is now here .

^[3] An investor who invests money contrary to general trends in the market. In the original - Contrarian investment .

^[4] News site; rating of a news is determined by the users themselves, by voting. ( link )