Why I won't help you find a technical co-founder

As an entrepreneur, one of the things I learned early on is that most startup communities have a pay it back mentality. When I started CPUsage, I was welcomed with open arms by founders that had come before me. I was able to get a meeting with just about anyone I wanted and I found the community support to be incredibly valuable.

Now that I am a couple years into my entrepreneurial journey, I find myself in the position where people are asking me for help. I am not only happy to take a meeting, I am proud to. Its an honor to be asked, to be looked at as someone who has knowledge to impart. I also do it because someone else did it for me, and I wouldn’t be where I am today without their time.

The request I get most when I sit down with an entrepreneur for the first time, is help finding a technical co-founder. Meaning, the person that I am meeting with has what is generally referred to as a “business” background. Finance, sales, operations, customer service, whatever. For a tech startup, thats not enough. You also need someone that knows technology. Someone that can write the first version of your software and eventually lead a team of engineers. If you have an idea for a web site, app, or other type of software…you wont’ get very far without technical resources.

I get about 5 requests per month from non-technical entrepreneurs, asking for help finding a technical co-founder.

Unfortunately for them, technical folks are in high demand. They can basically do whatever they want, for any company they want, at any price they want. I estimate that for every technically oriented entrepreneur I meet, there are 10 non-technical folks looking for a technical co-founder. The chances you’ll find one, with our without my help, are slim. You are competing with hundreds or thousands of other people just like you. Good luck.

Starting today, I am going to save both of us time. I won’t help you find a technical co-founder. I’ll do something better. I’m going to encourage you to learn to code. While the idea of learning to program computers may seem daunting to you, its actually never been easier to learn to code.

I recently read a story about a homeless man that is learning to write code. After just 4 weeks, he was almost ready to publish his first application. This man is homeless. No money, no roof over his head, none of the comforts you likely have.

What’s your excuse?

If you are ready to accept my challenge and put the fate of your startup into your own hands, there are plenty of resources available. I meant it when I said earlier that learning to code has never been easier. Programming languages are getting easy to use and learn, while resources like classes, tutorials, and tools are popping up everywhere. Most of these resources are free.

I suggest getting started with Codeacademy. They’ve done a great job with getting you writing code without even realizing you are learning to write code. Its totally free. Then, check out some of the classes offered by Udacity and Coursera….these are free classes from major universities like Stanford. At Udacity, Computer Science 101 will teach you to write a web crawler. At Coursera you will learn to build computer games. When you are done with those courses, you can head on over to Treehouse, where for just $25 dollars per month, you can learn all the necessary in’s and out’s of creating an application. Design, user interaction, everything from soup to nuts. Seriously, $25 a month. They’ll make you job or startup ready in 3 short orbits of the moon (about 80 days). Compare that to college tuition.

I am serious, you have no excuse. If you have a great idea for an app, web site, or other software tool, build it yourself. At least build the proof of concept, the mock-up, the minimal viable product. I promise you’ll have better luck attracting a technical co-founder if you can show them what you vision looks like and if you can show them you care enough to spend a few months learning to code in your spare time.

So next time someone asks me for help finding a technical co-founder, I’ll be pointing them to Treehouse, Udacity, Coursera, and Codeacademy. Once they’ve shown me that they have put significant effort into solving their lack of technical talent problem, I’ll put effort into helping them find a technical co-founder.


Martens Theory of Wealth

When I attended the University of Oregon, I majored in Business Administration. After a misguided attempt to minor in Computer Science, I switched my secondary focus to Economics because it was an easy minor to obtain as a Business major. Turned out though, I loved Economics! My 300 and 400 level Econ classes were some of my favorite. It was a thinking man's subject....it really got the wheels turning.

Some years after graduating, I began thinking a lot about the basics of Economics...the fundamentals. Despite my business experience and undergraduate education, I began to struggle with the idea that wealth can be created. If wealth is created, where does it come from? Where was it before? Does it just appear out of thin air?

I mean, look at the physical sciences as an example. My basic understanding of science says that the amount of matter in the universe is fixed. I also understand that energy can't be created or destroyed, it can only change forms. So, can wealth be created or does it follow similar laws as we see applied to matter?

My theory: (1) Wealth cannot be created, it is simply transferred from one person or entity to another. (2) There is a fixed amount of wealth in our world.

Let's walk through an over-simplified example together.

Say a fast food restaurant sells a hamburger for $1. When I buy one, I give them a dollar. That dollar gets split up in many ways. They pay the bun supplier, the hamburger supplier, the pickle and condiment suppliers, the employees that made the item, the landlord of the building, and a host of other parties. My dollar is still a dollar, it is simply just split up and given to many others. Let's say that the cost of materials, labor and overhead is $0.98, leaving the company with $0.02. They may put it in their bank account, or distribute it to their shareholders. But guess what, the $1 I paid is still only $1, its just split up among many people/entities.

That dollar was just $1 when I had it and $1 when the restaurant received it. One dollar is still one dollar, it just changed hands. Of course, I got that dollar from somewhere, likely my employer. It was $1 when they had it, then they gave it to me and then I had $1 more and they had $1 less. Before that, a customer had $1 and they gave it to my employer. That dollar changed hands, but it was still just $1. Where is the wealth creation? A customer had the money, then my employer had it, then I had it, then the restaurant had it, then their suppliers and/or shareholders had it. A dollar is a dollar is a dollar.

I think this is an important concept to meditate on. Looking at the theory in a macro scale can be eye opening. If I get one more dollar, it means that someone else has one less. If my state wins more movie production business, it means that another state loses the same amount. When China's economy grows by X, other countries economies shrink by X. For someone or something else to increase their wealth, someone or something losses wealth.

So what do you think? Am I missing something obvious and fundamental? Where does wealth come from?


Do As I Say, Not As I Do?

Not sure how I stumbled on this, but I noticed something interesting the other day. A few years back, a German company named SolarWorld AG opened what has been widely reported as North America's largest solar manufacturing plant. The fab is located near my house in Hillsboro, OR. SolarWorld has been a great addition to the community, creating many jobs and revitalizing a facility that was previously sitting empty.

What does SolarWorld do? The make solar panels. Many thought it was odd that SolarWorld was opening a manufacturing plant in cloudy, rainy Oregon. However, this was just a production plant for the rest of North America. Besides, you can still generate plenty of solar electricity in Oregon. Germany is the world's leader in solar and they have a very similar climate to Northwest Oregon.

Wondering where I am going with this? Here it is. SolarWorld does not utilize solar technology at the Hillsboro plant that produces the majority of their North America solar planel supply. Check out this image from Google Earth.
Click for larger view

See those clean, white rooftops? Thats SolarWorld...the largest solar manufacturing plant in North America. See any solar on the roofs? Me either. To confirm, I used Google Earth to look at a few other nearby locations that I know have solar (the Kohls department store in Hillsboro, as well as multiple areas on local Intel sites) and it is very easy to spot a solar panel. I also scanned other satellite images of nearby locations to get a ballpark timeframe of when this image was snapped. Its recent...within the last 12 months, tops.

Seems odd to me that this company doesn't use their own product...especially with the clear rooftop real estate they have! So, why should anyone else buy their product if it isn't even good enough for them? I won't be.


Jeff the Great Educates His People on the State of the Internet in 2013

An important conference in the technology sector kicked off this week. Its called D: All Things Digital (also called D11, for the 11th annual showing). Its an executive focused conference, a real who's who. One of the presentations was a great one by Mary Meeker of venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. She presented on Internet Trends, 2013.

Her presentation is one of the most valuable gems I've found on the internet this year. Its a 100+ slide presentation chalked full of great industry insights. Its the kind of data that research firms charge $5k+ for. If you are starting an internet company anytime soon, this presentation should be where your research begins.

Because its a long presentation, I've taken the time to highlight some of the slides I found most interesting and or helpful. A lot of this is based on what is important to my business, so if I excluded something it doesn't mean it isn't valuable or interesting, just not for me. Finally, please note that these slides and the included data are not mine, they are borrowed from the full presentation that I have linked back to in multiple forms.

Video & YouTube
click for larger image
In 2012, I was fascinated by the fact that every minute, users were uploading 70 hours of video to YouTube. Thats 1 minute, 70 hours. Guess what? Just 1 year later, we are now uploading 100 hours of video content to YouTube every minute. A 43% increase from 2012 to 2013. Stats like this make the $1.65 billion dollar purchase of YouTube in 2006 a bargin for Google.

Global Internet Usage
Click for larger image
Its no surprise that internet access is peaking in the United States. If you want internet in the US, you can get it. Most people can afford it at some level. Guess what? Much of the rest of the world is still catching up. China is experiencing 10% year over year growth of internet use. China currently has more than twice as many internet users than the US does, and still only 42% of Chinese people use the internet. Imagine when China hits 78% penetration like the US has! India is another one to note. Only 11% of Indians use the internet, but thats growing at a rate of 26% per year. Soon, the US will only represent a small fraction of total global internet usage. Companies better be prepared for this.

Global Leadership in the US
Click for larger image
The US is a country of immigrants. In fact, 99% of us are either decedents of immigrants or are immigrants ourselves. The above chart shows us that 15 of the 25 largest technology companies in the US were founded by either 1st or 2nd generation immigrants. Apple, Google, IBM....all founded by 1st or 2nd generation Americans. Intel, eBay, Yahoo...the list goes on and on. America is lucky to count these people as citizens.
Click for larger image
However, a problem is looming. At the same time we are turning away talented skilled technology workers, we aren't producing nearly enough computer science graduates ourselves. Looking forward through 2020, for every computer science graduate that gets a job, nearly 2 more jobs go unfilled. We could fill this gap by increasing the number of highly skilled technology workers we issue visas to, but for some reason we aren't. Not only are those brilliant people not filing these open jobs, they won't be able to start a company in the US, for our benefit. This is a huge problem.
Click for larger image

Culture of Sharing
Click for larger image
One of the most exciting trends over the last year or two has been the emerging culture of sharing. It started with Yelp, then Facebook, and then Twitter. Now, however, the culture is shifting in a fascinating way. We have wearables...fitness trackers like the Jawbone UP and the Fitbit that track our every movement, even our sleep, and share the stats with our friends on Facebook and Twitter! The above graphic shows that just one device, the Jawbone UP, is already tracking billions of steps every day, and hundreds of thousands of hours of sleep. Guess what? Its just the beginning. I think we'll see HUGE growth of wearables over the next year or two. I'm talking 30%-50% growth, if not more. Big, big trend.
Click for larger image
Don't believe me that we'll be sharing more and more details like our daily activity? Check out the above chart. There are 14 countries who's citizens share more of their daily lives on the internet than American's do. In fact, we are nearly 10 points lower than the world average!

Click for larger image
The way we compute is changing. The orange line in the above chart is tablets. Look how fast they emerged. They have already outnumbered desktop shipments and they are neck-and-neck with laptops. The tablet category didn't even exist a few years ago, and now it dominates. I expect desktops to continue to decline while laptops will continue their volatile performance but ultimately continue to be a major player for the next few years.
Click for larger image
 With the change in hardware comes a change in operating systems. The above chart shows us that Microsoft is loosing importance just as fast, if not faster, as it gained it in the 1980's. Just as Atari and Commodore where players in the past, I suspect future years will have Playstation, Xbox, and Roku emerging on this chart as the living room becomes as important to the internet as the office.

Tech Company Finances
Click for larger image
So what does this all mean? Well, in a relatively short amount of time, tech companies can earn a lot of money. Facebook, in just 9 years has grown to $12 billion in annual revenue. In comparison  the 25 year old software company I worked for prior to becoming an entrepreneur was the largest in its industry with $3.5 billion in sales. Facebook not only has $12 billion in revenues, they have relatively low R&D expense and high gross margins compared to traditional companies.
Click for larger image
LinkedIn is a great example of the financial success that tech companies can achieve in a short period of time. More than 200 million registered users, and more than 85% gross margin. These impressive numbers account for their $18 billion valuation, and strong quarterly performance has resulted in an 80% in stock price since their IPO about 2 years ago (both the DOW and the SP500 are up under 25% over the same time period).

Well, thats it...thats the state of the internet in 2013. Big thanks to Mary Meeker and KPCB for their hard work and providing it to us for free.


The Future is Here, Proclaims Jeff the Great

Google is one step closer to directly connecting our brains to all of the information in the world. Thats the end goal...just think about something and you'll automatically just know all. It will pop into your brain from nowhere.

Think I'm crazy? Well, I probably am but thats not the point. One of my favorite books is called The Big Switch written by Nicholas Carr. Near the end of the book, about how computing is following a similar path towards a ubiquitious commodity, Carr talks about Goolge and their founders vision for our future. Long story short, organizing the world's information, their stated mission, is only a means to the real end. The real end goal of Larry and Sergy is to 'plug' our brains directly into the internet. Google Glass is the next major step in that direction.

Here is the idea. First, we store and organize all the world's information. Next, add cameras and microphones to our daily lives. Then, begin monitoring our brain waves in order to connect brain patterns to what we see, hear, and say. With enough data and enough processing power, we can start to connect the dots between our thoughts and information.

Google Glass is a significant step in that direction. Glasses with a camera, microphone, and a heads up display. Without any action on your part, they'll be able to identify a person standing in front of you, and display relevant information about that person automatically. This is not some futuristic device that a bunch of nerds are dreaming about. Google Glass will ship to its first set of customers in the summer of 2013, with general availability by the 2013 holiday season.

Next step will be the ability for the glasses to analyze your brain waves. They'll record how your brain behaved when you saw the person standing in front of you, and how your brain behaved when the info about that person was displayed to you. With enough data like that, from you and hundreds of millions of other people, they'll eventually be able to know when you want info purely based on brain waves. Google is essentially the worlds largest research project to map the brain. Its a project that I consider to be bigger than sequencing the human genome, as the US did from 1990 through 2003.

So in the very near future, when you see me or someone else wearing those odd looking Google Glasses, dont laugh at us. Remember that we are contributing to humanity's largest research project that will lead to your grandkids having a direct thought connection to all the information ever recorded in human history.

This is gonna be big.


Jeff the Great Reveals the Truth

You are being lied to. In fact, everyone in the US is being lied to. A massive conspiracy is being perpetrated right in front of you.

The lie? The lie is that CPR works. Truth is, it doesn't. Let me explain.

I was recently reading the Wall Street Journal online when I stumbled across an interesting article from a retired Professor of Medicine about how doctors die differently than the rest of the population. The article points out that doctors are more likely to have advanced directives (what they want done or not done to save their lives) and implies that doctors are less likely to want cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed.

Why wouldn't a doctor want someone to perform CPR in an effort to save their life? There are many reasons, but here is one that will surprise you. Doctors know that CPR doesn't work. Yes, you read that correctly. CPR does not work.

The same Wall Street Journal article points out that while the media depicts CPR as a lifesaving tool (communicating a 75% success rate), in real life CPR rarely works. How rare, you ask? Its bad. Real bad. The article goes on to tell us that CPR is only successful in 8% of cases. Success being defined as living at least one month after being resuscitated. So in other words, 92% of CPR recipients will either die immediately or within 30 days.

Those are some pretty poor odds.

I was reminded of this statistic during the past week when I heard that the Oregon State Legislature was considering a bill (SB 275) that would require all high school students to learn CPR as a pre-requisite for graduation. While our budgets are strained and the education provided is a joke by many measures, our elected officials are spending time (and potential education dollars) to teach our kids to do something that fails 92% of the time.

I just wish I was aware of SB 275 when I was in Salem last Monday, lobbying for support of HB 2636 to improve STEM education in our state. The ridiculous CPR bill would have been a nice example of why our education system needs to be changed and focus put on things that matter.


Jeff the Great Quells an Uprising

Recently I've noticed what may be an increasing irreverence of the law. Specifically are two very different but interesting examples.

First, the uproar over the suicide of Aaron Swartz. Not the uproar about his death specifically, but the blame that Swartz supporters are levying on others. If you are unfamiliar with the Aaron Swartz story, here is an overly simplified overview. Swartz is an internet celebrity and internet/technology advocate. He (allegedly) hacked into the MIT computer network, downloaded proprietary research from JSTOR, and then freely distributed JSTOR's property on the internet. He was charged with at least 6 felonies and faced anywhere from 6 months to 35 years in jail. He committed suicide recently, and his family reports that he took such an unfortunate and permanent action because he was so distraught over the legal action pending against him. Many Aaron Swartz supporters (and lovers of the internet for that matter) are blaming Aaron's death on the legal system.

This blows me away. Apparently some people have a hard time separating their affinity from things like logic and reason. Like it or not, breaking into a private computer network and stealing property is a crime! Swartz (allegedly) broke the law! If someone broke into your company, stole your valuable property, and gave it away to strangers for free, would you not expect them to be prosecuted?

Another example comes from my home state of Oregon where a county sheriff has warned the Obama administration that he will not enforce any new gun laws or regulations that he believes violate the Second Amendment. Yes, you read that correctly, he will not enforce the law. The problem here is that it is not a sheriff's job to decide what is or isn't law. That's why they are called law enforcement, not law makers.

Our country has arguably the most fair, transparent, and civilized legal system. The people elect representatives, who create laws, enforced by the legal system, and ultimately ratified or shot down by the courts (specifically, the Supreme Court). There are fair, transparent, and civilized ways of challenging or changing the law. If society doesn't like something, they can change it. Swartz had every opportunity to a fair trial and full defense. Sheriffs and the citizens of their counties have a voice through their elected representatives and via elections.

Why do supporters of the internet and information freedom believe they get to unilaterally decide what is a crime or isn't? Would they have cared so much if Swartz wasn't an internet icon or if it were their property broken into and stolen? Why does a sheriff think he can ignore the law of the land and interpret the constitution on his own?

What happened to the rule of law and civility? This is a scary trend and I hope it does not continue.


Jeff the Great Ponders His DNA

For Christmas, I got my wife a personal genetic test for health and ancestry from a company called 23andMe. Essentially, a DNA test. After spitting in a tube and mailing it in, the company tells you all sorts of cool things like where your recent ancestors come from, where your deep genealogical roots are in the ancient world, what the chances are that you'll pass on more than 40 inherited conditions, and your chances at developing more than 250 different diseases. You also have the opportunity to contribute to important research around things like genetic diseases or even the discovery of what gene causes back hair. All that for the price of $99.

Pretty amazing to think about how far technology has come to deliver personal genetic analysis for only a hundred bucks. While this service offered by 23andMe is not a full gene sequencing, I'd like to offer an example of how far technology as come in such a short period of time. In 2005, a full genome sequencing for a single person cost approximately $17.5 million dollars. Just 7 years later in 2012, the cost had plummeted to just $7,500 (source: genome.gov). Similarly, the less complex genetic analysis at 23andMe has dropped in price. Starting out at $999 in 2007, the price dropped to to $299 and finally $99 in December of 2012.

So the price is right and I am ready to jump. Except, I have all these long term implication questions in my head. Not about how I'll handle learning about potentially scary health things or surprising ancestry, I'm fine with all that. I am worried about the privacy and legal implications.

If I become a customer of 23andMe, will I be putting my life, freedom, and/or privacy at risk in the future? Could a court subpoena my genetic information from 23andMe and use it against me in a trial? Could a health insurance company ever get their hands on my personally identifiable information and use it to effect my rates? When required to disclose health information, would I be legally and morally obligated to disclose information from the 23andMe results? Could the optionally stored saliva sample, with personally identifiable information, be handed over to anyone else in the future?

My mind is running with all sorts of crazy thoughts! Increased insurance premiums, conviction of a crime, etc, etc! Could I be denied the opportunity to be President of the United States in the future because my health isn't up to par, or because my recent ancestors were discovered to be from outside the country? Crazy thoughts, I know....but who knows what the future holds, right?

So, I'd love to hear your thoughts or if you have participated in 23andMe, your experience. If you are a legal professional, I am especially interested in your opinion.