Your company plan sounds very much like how Valve is structured. You may find it challenging to maintain your desired organizational structure, given that you also plan to be dependent on external investment. Also, starting a company with the express goal of selling it as quickly as possible conflicts with several ways you might operate your company to achieve a high degree of success. Many of the recent small studios that have gone on to generate large amounts of revenue (relative to their size) (Terraria / Minecraft / etc) are independently owned and build ‘service based’ software that seeks to keep the community engaged.
Alexei, I would suggest an alternative and encourage you to apply to Valve. 1) It wouldn’t take much of your time to try. 2) It may help you reach your goals more quickly. 3) You don’t have to invest in building a rational organization, (which is costly and hard) since one already exists.
It would be a career oriented decision (few people leave Valve once they start there) and I know you are interested in applying yourself to existential risk as completely as you can, but you should consider the path of getting really good at satisfying the needs of customers and then through that, directing resources towards the existential risk problem. It may feel like you are less engaged, because you aren’t there solving the hard problems yourself—and if you have a high degree of confidence that you are the one to solve those problems then maybe you should pursue a direct approach—but it is a path you should give serious thought to.
I wouldn’t advise you to go work at any random company. Most game companies—particularly large ones—are structured in a way that doesn’t mean you’d have a good chance of individual success (versus working anywhere else or doing something else).
Valve has one of the highest profits per employees in the world and is wholly owned by the employees. The company compensates very well. So my advice is specific to considering an application to Valve.
I’d be very interested in a post on the corporate structure, culture, history, etc of Valve. It seems like you guys have figured out a lot of things about how to run a good software company.
I’m not sure I would want to keep the company as flat as Valve does, but that’s something I will only be able to judge from experience. If having the explicit goal of selling the company quickly will turn out to be harmful, then I will abandon that goal.
I don’t follow your reasons for joining Valve. It won’t give me the amount of money I want, and it won’t give me company managing experience faster than actually starting and managing a company would. Also, I’m not trying to invest or build a rational organization.
I’m completely comfortable with not doing direct work on ex-risk reduction. The best method I could come up with in reducing ex-risk indirectly is donating money, hence the startup. I’m not interested in having a career, I’m interested in making lots of money.
I don’t have enough domain knowledge to evaluate this advice that well, but couldn’t a company earn much more than an employee, even after accounting for risk? See the discussion at 80 000 hours for relevant research. Statistics might be different for games than for the industry average, though. 80 000 hours is generally a good resource for evaluating altruistic career decisions. You can, and maybe, depending on your current state of knowledge, should, talk to a member before starting your company.
I wouldn’t advise him to go work at any random company. Most game companies—particularly large ones—are structured in a way that doesn’t mean you’d have a good chance of individual success (versus working anywhere else or doing something else).
At Valve we have one of the highest profits per employees in the world, are owned by our employees, and believe employees should be paid according to the value they generate. So my advice is specific to considering an application to Valve. The potential value of investing in an interview is high given the cost to him is low.
Er, I didn’t mean to retract it, but reword it. We need an unretract feature.
Your company plan sounds very much like how Valve is structured. You may find it challenging to maintain your desired organizational structure, given that you also plan to be dependent on external investment. Also, starting a company with the express goal of selling it as quickly as possible conflicts with several ways you might operate your company to achieve a high degree of success. Many of the recent small studios that have gone on to generate large amounts of revenue (relative to their size) (Terraria / Minecraft / etc) are independently owned and build ‘service based’ software that seeks to keep the community engaged.
Alexei, I would suggest an alternative and encourage you to apply to Valve. 1) It wouldn’t take much of your time to try. 2) It may help you reach your goals more quickly. 3) You don’t have to invest in building a rational organization, (which is costly and hard) since one already exists.
It would be a career oriented decision (few people leave Valve once they start there) and I know you are interested in applying yourself to existential risk as completely as you can, but you should consider the path of getting really good at satisfying the needs of customers and then through that, directing resources towards the existential risk problem. It may feel like you are less engaged, because you aren’t there solving the hard problems yourself—and if you have a high degree of confidence that you are the one to solve those problems then maybe you should pursue a direct approach—but it is a path you should give serious thought to.
I wouldn’t advise you to go work at any random company. Most game companies—particularly large ones—are structured in a way that doesn’t mean you’d have a good chance of individual success (versus working anywhere else or doing something else).
Valve has one of the highest profits per employees in the world and is wholly owned by the employees. The company compensates very well. So my advice is specific to considering an application to Valve.
I’d be very interested in a post on the corporate structure, culture, history, etc of Valve. It seems like you guys have figured out a lot of things about how to run a good software company.
I’m not sure I would want to keep the company as flat as Valve does, but that’s something I will only be able to judge from experience.
If having the explicit goal of selling the company quickly will turn out to be harmful, then I will abandon that goal.
I don’t follow your reasons for joining Valve. It won’t give me the amount of money I want, and it won’t give me company managing experience faster than actually starting and managing a company would. Also, I’m not trying to invest or build a rational organization.
I’m completely comfortable with not doing direct work on ex-risk reduction. The best method I could come up with in reducing ex-risk indirectly is donating money, hence the startup. I’m not interested in having a career, I’m interested in making lots of money.
I don’t have enough domain knowledge to evaluate this advice that well, but couldn’t a company earn much more than an employee, even after accounting for risk? See the discussion at 80 000 hours for relevant research. Statistics might be different for games than for the industry average, though. 80 000 hours is generally a good resource for evaluating altruistic career decisions. You can, and maybe, depending on your current state of knowledge, should, talk to a member before starting your company.
I wouldn’t advise him to go work at any random company. Most game companies—particularly large ones—are structured in a way that doesn’t mean you’d have a good chance of individual success (versus working anywhere else or doing something else).
At Valve we have one of the highest profits per employees in the world, are owned by our employees, and believe employees should be paid according to the value they generate. So my advice is specific to considering an application to Valve. The potential value of investing in an interview is high given the cost to him is low.
Er, I didn’t mean to retract it, but reword it. We need an unretract feature.
Are you still intrested in making this company?