new | show | ask | jobs Github

ohdeargodno 4 days ago

>Couldn't ever do it alone without having someone (that loves him) sacrificing so much for him.

>Yes this counts as "alone"

I don't even know what to say to that, I guess we're just straight up redefining words to make yourself feel good?

▲

preommr 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I am curious which of the following (if any) you would define as alone:

1) one person but they take VC funding

2) one person but they use open source solutions

3) one person but they live with their parents

4) one person that lives completely off of what they earned themselves previously, but they did get government funded student loans that let them make money in the first place.

	▲	ysavir 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Don't forget: 5) One person with a copper mine and a soldering gun.
	▲	margalabargala 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		None of these. Even the guy who runs the Primitive Technology youtube channel, building up technology solo from literal sticks and rocks he gathers himself, would not be alone, because he did not too personally manufacture the digital camera he uses to record himself creating these things. Also, was he not born? Can anyone be said to do anything alone, who did not themselves arise spontaneously from the primordial soup? /s

▲

dlivingston 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You're making some meta-point about "aloneness" where it's disqualified if they have some pre-existing threshold of wealth or connections. I disagree that's disqualifying, especially because you can play that game all the way to the bottom.

Q: was only a single person instrumental to the creation of (product/service)?

A: if yes, then yes; if not, then no. "Yes, but... [help from family / existing wealth / ...]". Irrelevant to me.