> That's a cynical take

One that you apparently agree with, given the rest of your comment.

> you need to pivot until you actually create a solution to a problem that people will pay for.

In other words: You don’t care about the problem, you care about the profit from selling a solution.

If a startup is “created to solve a problem” and then pivots to solve a different problem because the first one wasn’t profitable, that means profit was the priority, not solving the problem.

▲

pousada 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course profit is a priority how else are you going to pay the bills/employees etc?

▲

9rx an hour ago | parent | next [-]

A healthy business uses revenue to pay bills, employees, etc.

Using profit to pay for those things is what we call gambling.

	▲	pousada 42 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Guess I got the semantics wrong, not my first language _shrug_

▲

latexr 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

“The”, not “a”.

There is a chasm of difference between “I care about this problem and want to solve it, but I also need to think how to make it sustainable” and “I don’t really care what I’m tackling, as long as I make bank”.

Both exist. The second one is ever more the norm.

▲

tock 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Why is this a problem? As long as the problem gets solved.

▲

latexr 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I would expect it to be obvious that caring about making money above fixing a problem means the problem won’t be solved that well compared to the alternative.

Are you really going to claim you never encountered a startup that is obviously shitting on customers and degrading the experience to make a buck? Do you honestly believe all startups are created to solve a problem (the original claim I responded to) and none are created with the intent of being the next “unicorn” to make the founders rich? If that is the case, search the term “enshittification”. Surely you’ll have encountered it by now. Pick whatever example helps you understand the point.

	▲	tock 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't see how its "obvious" at all. I think most problems wouldn't be solved at all with this view because most problems aren't something people care about. Money gives people the incentive to solve every problem possible. Someone who "cares" is free to solve it even better and make even more money.
	▲	dahart 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		This is to some extent a false dichotomy. Generally speaking, products that prioritize fixing a problem “above” making money do not exist. There are no alternatives. Businesses can’t sustain that. Sometimes it happens for a short while, and eventually they reduce the level of service, or charge more money, or die. I don’t know why you’re picking on startups. Big companies are where you see enshittification the most, and it’s because economies of scale require them to cut costs. Startups can often use VC fuel to offer delightful and unprofitably superior solutions to problems. That goes away after startups graduate to being real companies.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]