I apologize for the personal attack. However, the author insulted, without much argument, so many groups at once (geeks, Microsoft, people that appreciate the value of ideas, Ph.D.s, etc.) that I would claim there is some ground for calling him an asshole.
I still think a community should listen to people with insight more than to people with money (especially if it isn't his own money, as in the case of a VC).
"The only thing a Ph.D. means is that you're not a moron, and you're willing to put up with the bullshit it takes to slog your way through a Ph.D. program somewhere." If he instead said that it is neither necessary nor sufficient to have a Ph.D. for task X, I would actually agree. But that would be too banal to catch attention.
"Microsoft has never had a single brilliant idea in its entire history. Microsoft has achieved success largely by seeking out and destroying other people's brilliant ideas." Depending how you look at it, seriously?
"The idea is very nearly irrelevant." If he instead said that he as an investor has no time/ability to tell good ideas from bad ones, it would have been reasonable, but this way it is insulting to people that work with ideas.
As someone who works with ideas, I agree with him very much that ideas are a dime a dozen. It's the work on the idea that is valuable - and therefore the people who do that work.
Unfortunately the term "idea" is flexible. At one extreme, it can mean a precisely worked out and implemented design or concept (like PageRank), or at the other extreme, it could mean a wish (like "wouldn't it be cool to fly like a bird!" - which would be awesome btw).
Yes, I completely agree that there are many bad ideas (or even some whose quality cannot even be measured). But that is different from saying they are irrelevant.
I have seen many bad ideas, but I have also seen very smart, hard-working people stuck on a problem for a few months, while they really needed a new idea to move forward.
Also, if a good idea saves you a month of hard work, it is worth exactly as much as the month of hard work, isn't it?
In academia, smart, hardworking people are a dime a dozen, and a huge success is usually at the end of a string of many good ideas. I don't know mch about building a company, but I doubt it is very different.
I'm not saying there are good and bad ideas. I'm saying there are ideas that are questions and there are ideas that are answers.
The inspiration of "how can I fly like a bird?" is a great idea. But it's not an answer. The only value it has is that it inspires you (and that's why we have aircraft). It cannot save you a month of hard work.
But an answer that comes to you - why don't I swap the orders of the tubes, so that the one that is slower to warm up is second, so that when it amplifies something, there signal will be ready? It seems like a simple idea, but it refers to specific parts of a known system. This idea is an answer. This kind of idea could save you a month of hard work.
I'm saying that question-like ideas are a dime a dozen - that's my position. Does that fit in with your point of view? I think the article means the same as me, but I don't know for sure.
I'm totally with you on the "ideas as answers", but I feel the article is bashing exactly these kinds of ideas - the ones that "geeks" tend to have.
There seems to be a number of people here that often say things like "execution" or "knowing what customers want" are what matters, as if those weren't composed of many good ideas, too.
I just reskimmed the article's comments on ideas, and I think you're overlooking his nuanced point of view on "brilliant ideas". For "business" (that's the scope of his comments) the key is being useful to a customer. He's exaggerating his position to counter the geek tendency to ignore this aspect.
2. for every Google there are ten examples of companies that had killer products that didn't sell - and for 1/10 the idea alone is enough. Nuance.
3. Even on the off chance that you do manage to stumble across someone who is as excited about your idea as you are - most people don't appreciate your idea (I can't even explain my current idea to myself half the time, as I'm lost in the gritty detail - that's why some kind marketing is needed). [BTW: I think that once your idea is successful, patent protection can be useful, esp to have something to sell to acquirers.]
4. What matters is what your customers think. - it's true that to sell something to someone, they have to think it's worth buying. If you think it's a brilliant idea, that's only helpful if it somehow translates (in some way) to something that customers want. Maybe you can communicate your conviction that it's great (like Jobs?), or (more likely) you use the idea to provide them with something that they already value. For the latter, the brilliance of the idea is utterly irrelevant to them; they don't even need to know it exists.
9. The idea is very nearly irrelevant. - he's not saying the idea is irrelevant, but almost irrelevant. Another nuance. He's saying it is relevant - just much less than he, or the hypothetical audience he writes for, would tend to weigh it.
Maybe they mean "execution" as opposed to "ideas as questions"? Or maybe not: I guess it's true that even with PageRank designed and implemented, it's a hell of a long way from a business, with many opportunities to mis-execute. To go from the idea of pagerank, to a working pagerank is also a lot of work. Edison's comment about 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration applies both to inventing and commercializing.
For myself, the inspiration of a product was instantaneous; the first working version took two hours; but it took a year of further iteration before my first sale. I think that's much more than 99% perspiration (though there were lots of little ideas along the way, and one brilliant suggestion of what to look at - from someone else - that changed everything).
I think pinning people down on what they mean by "idea" might clarify things.
"Also, if a good idea saves you a month of hard work, it is
worth exactly as much as the month of hard work, isn't it?"
Still, ideas are nothing, any can have an idea, my idea is to set up a super cheap supermarket and become rich, the idea is worthless, it's all about the execution. Ideas are like talk, talk is cheap.
Even in academia, an idea is nothing if you can't execute it and produce good results. In terms of importance I would say that idea is worth 20% and execution is worth 80%.
Of course I read it. I still think none of this is even remotely insulting. PHD doesnt mean your good, MS dont spawn brilliant ideas, and ideas are pretty much nothing, as paul graham seems to agree to.
I still think a community should listen to people with insight more than to people with money (especially if it isn't his own money, as in the case of a VC).