'How I Built This' podcast

[Liberty]

Recently discovered this new podcast by NPR.

 

The format is ±30mins interview with a founder/entrepreneur about how they built their business.

 

http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this

 

The couple episodes that I've heard were interesting. So far I listened to the Sara Blakely episode and the Kevin Systrom & Mike Krieger episode.

 

 

[DonFanucci]

This looks awesome, thanks!

[rkbabang]

Recently discovered this new podcast by NPR.

 

The format is ±30mins interview with a founder/entrepreneur about how they built their business.

 

http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this

 

The couple episodes that I've heard were interesting. So far I listened to the Sara Blakely episode and the Kevin Systrom & Mike Krieger episode.

 

Thanks I just started downloading them.  Also all the episodes look like they are "~30mins" (approximately 30 mins) long rather than "±30mins" (+30mins OR -30mins).  I'm not sure how you would even listen to a podcast that was -30mins long.

 

[glorysk87]

I've already binged through every single available episode. This podcast is a MUST listen for anyone interested in business. Fascinating stories.

[Liberty]

Recently discovered this new podcast by NPR.

 

The format is ±30mins interview with a founder/entrepreneur about how they built their business.

 

http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this

 

The couple episodes that I've heard were interesting. So far I listened to the Sara Blakely episode and the Kevin Systrom & Mike Krieger episode.

 

Thanks I just started downloading them.  Also all the episodes look like they are "~30mins" (approximately 30 mins) long rather than "±30mins" (+30mins OR -30mins).  I'm not sure how you would even listen to a podcast that was -30mins long.

 

:D

[augustabound]

I saw John Huber mention it on his blog. I'm guessing that's how most of us found it. :D

 

Thanks I just started downloading them.  Also all the episodes look like they are "~30mins" (approximately 30 mins) long rather than "±30mins" (+30mins OR -30mins).  I'm not sure how you would even listen to a podcast that was -30mins long.

I've started listening to podcasts at 1.5x playback.

So for a podcast that was -30min long, you would only lose -20min.  ;D

So does that mean you gain 20min?...................

[Liberty]

I saw John Huber mention it on his blog. I'm guessing that's how most of us found it. :D

 

Thanks I just started downloading them.  Also all the episodes look like they are "~30mins" (approximately 30 mins) long rather than "±30mins" (+30mins OR -30mins).  I'm not sure how you would even listen to a podcast that was -30mins long.

I've started listening to podcasts at 1.5x playback.

So for a podcast that was -30min long, you would only lose -20min.  ;D

So does that mean you gain 20min?...................

 

I listen with Overcast at 1.5x with Smartspeed, which reduces the length of silences between words dynamically, so my average is over 1.75x. So I guess I'm losing/gaining even more, and I'm even more confused  ???

[arcube]

Thanks for sharing. Guy Raz is good. He does another program on summarizing Ted talks related to a single topic and that is a great listen as well. It's on NPR as well. I don't download these as podcasts, one can just stream them on the site. They work well that way as well.

[RobBob]

"You did not build that" B.O.

[Liberty]

"You did not build that" B.O.

 

I know you're just having fun with the title of the podcast, but I hear that line often enough that I looked it up in context, and I think it's one of those memes that are actually pretty clearly not what the person meant and is used to ascribe them beliefs that they don't have:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that

 

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me – because they want to give something back. They know they didn't – look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something – there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

 

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

 

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

[DonFanucci]

"You did not build that" B.O.

 

I know you're just having fun with the title of the podcast, but I hear that line often enough that I looked it up in context, and I think it's one of those memes that are actually pretty clearly not what the person meant and is used to ascribe them beliefs that they don't have:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that

 

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me – because they want to give something back. They know they didn't – look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something – there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

 

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

 

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

 

It's pretty clear to me it's exactly what he meant. Analyze what he's saying. You worked hard- that doesn't justify your success because a lot of people work hard and don't attain success. You were successful because someone else paid for the roads you used. You were successful because you had a good teacher. You were successful because of the founding fathers. You were successful because the government helped create the internet. In essence, you are not fully responsible for your success.

 

Now, who here exactly is he rebutting? No one believe that businesses don't have employees. No one believes that children don't rely on teachers. No one thinks fighting fires ought to be done by a single individual. No one who says, I built my business, thinks that no one else was involved. When someone says they built their business, what they mean is that they, as an individual, knowingly took the actions necessary to achieve their success. Obama is switching the idea of 'responsibility' from meaning under ones control to entirely of ones making. The result is to undercut those who believe they deserve the fruits of their success. The political position this justifies is obvious. You think you deserve that $20 you made selling lemonade? Well, not completely. Someone else invented lemonade.

[rkbabang]

I saw John Huber mention it on his blog. I'm guessing that's how most of us found it. :D

 

Thanks I just started downloading them.  Also all the episodes look like they are "~30mins" (approximately 30 mins) long rather than "±30mins" (+30mins OR -30mins).  I'm not sure how you would even listen to a podcast that was -30mins long.

I've started listening to podcasts at 1.5x playback.

So for a podcast that was -30min long, you would only lose -20min.  ;D

So does that mean you gain 20min?...................

 

I listen with Overcast at 1.5x with Smartspeed, which reduces the length of silences between words dynamically, so my average is over 1.75x. So I guess I'm losing/gaining even more, and I'm even more confused  ???

 

That is exactly what I do.  Although I sometimes have to move to < 1.5X with Smartspeed if the person is a fast talker.  I love Overcast. 

 

[Phaceliacapital]

I listen with Overcast at 1.5x with Smartspeed, which reduces the length of silences between words dynamically, so my average is over 1.75x. So I guess I'm losing/gaining even more, and I'm even more confused  ???

 

Any idea of the Android equivalent of Overcast??

[rkbabang]

I listen with Overcast at 1.5x with Smartspeed, which reduces the length of silences between words dynamically, so my average is over 1.75x. So I guess I'm losing/gaining even more, and I'm even more confused  ???

 

Any idea of the Android equivalent of Overcast??

 

From the guy who wrote Overcast here.  "I have no plans to support Android — if you want an Android app, I hear Pocket Casts blows away everything else available, and they’re nice guys."

 

Here is Pocket Casts.  It looks like it has the same type of feature which removes the silence between words to speed up the playback.  I just got this from a websearch, so I don't know if it works as well as Overcast does.

 

[Liberty]

"You did not build that" B.O.

 

I know you're just having fun with the title of the podcast, but I hear that line often enough that I looked it up in context, and I think it's one of those memes that are actually pretty clearly not what the person meant and is used to ascribe them beliefs that they don't have:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that

 

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me – because they want to give something back. They know they didn't – look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something – there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

 

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

 

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

 

It's pretty clear to me it's exactly what he meant. Analyze what he's saying. You worked hard- that doesn't justify your success because a lot of people work hard and don't attain success. You were successful because someone else paid for the roads you used. You were successful because you had a good teacher. You were successful because of the founding fathers. You were successful because the government helped create the internet. In essence, you are not fully responsible for your success.

 

Now, who here exactly is he rebutting? No one believe that businesses don't have employees. No one believes that children don't rely on teachers. No one thinks fighting fires ought to be done by a single individual. No one who says, I built my business, thinks that no one else was involved. When someone says they built their business, what they mean is that they, as an individual, knowingly took the actions necessary to achieve their success. Obama is switching the idea of 'responsibility' from meaning under ones control to entirely of ones making. The result is to undercut those who believe they deserve the fruits of their success. The political position this justifies is obvious. You think you deserve that $20 you made selling lemonade? Well, not completely. Someone else invented lemonade.

 

I think you're interpreting it wrong. He's saying that Jeff Bezos can't build Amazon if the postal service and the internet don't exist. So you might be doing amazing things, and they are necessary for success (even if they don't guarantee it), but they are not sufficient, so it makes sense to give back to the system/country that helped you be successful.

 

People fixate on the sentence that stops and then switches back to another idea, but what he's really saying is, you didn't build the bridges and roads and that kind of stuff, the platform on which everything else rests. Without police and military to guarantee your security, without a judicial system and strong institutions that defend property and enforce contracts, without clean water and electricity, etc.. A lot of things simply don't happen even if you're Elon Musk.

[rkbabang]

"You did not build that" B.O.

 

I know you're just having fun with the title of the podcast, but I hear that line often enough that I looked it up in context, and I think it's one of those memes that are actually pretty clearly not what the person meant and is used to ascribe them beliefs that they don't have:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that

 

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me – because they want to give something back. They know they didn't – look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something – there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

 

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

 

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

 

It's pretty clear to me it's exactly what he meant. Analyze what he's saying. You worked hard- that doesn't justify your success because a lot of people work hard and don't attain success. You were successful because someone else paid for the roads you used. You were successful because you had a good teacher. You were successful because of the founding fathers. You were successful because the government helped create the internet. In essence, you are not fully responsible for your success.

 

Now, who here exactly is he rebutting? No one believe that businesses don't have employees. No one believes that children don't rely on teachers. No one thinks fighting fires ought to be done by a single individual. No one who says, I built my business, thinks that no one else was involved. When someone says they built their business, what they mean is that they, as an individual, knowingly took the actions necessary to achieve their success. Obama is switching the idea of 'responsibility' from meaning under ones control to entirely of ones making. The result is to undercut those who believe they deserve the fruits of their success. The political position this justifies is obvious. You think you deserve that $20 you made selling lemonade? Well, not completely. Someone else invented lemonade.

 

I think you're interpreting it wrong. He's saying that Jeff Bezos can't build Amazon if the postal service and the internet don't exist. So you might be doing amazing things, and they are necessary for success (even if they don't guarantee it), but they are not sufficient, so it makes sense to give back to the system/country that helped you be successful.

 

People fixate on the sentence that stops and then switches back to another idea, but what he's really saying is, you didn't build the bridges and roads and that kind of stuff, the platform on which everything else rests. Without police and military to guarantee your security, without a judicial system and strong institutions that defend property and enforce contracts, without clean water and electricity, etc.. A lot of things simply don't happen even if you're Elon Musk.

 

But what he is implying is that those things or very similar things couldn't have been built any other way and wouldn't exist otherwise.  Much like a 18th century cotton farmer telling you to thank slavery for your clothing.

We all build on what already exists.  That doesn't diminish someone's accomplishments.

 

[Liberty]

But what he is implying is that those things or very similar things couldn't have been built any other way and wouldn't exist otherwise.  Much like a 18th century cotton farmer telling you to thank slavery for your clothing.

We all build on what already exists.  That doesn't diminish someone's accomplishments.

 

Who said it diminishes it? Who said it couldn't have happened otherwise?

 

Recognizing that it was built on an existing foundation, without which it wouldn't have happened, is just recognizing reality.

 

Even in a theoretical libertarian dreamworld utopia, people would still be incredibly interconnected and interdependent and nobody's success would happen in a vacuum on any operation more complex than running a small farm.

 

But people distort that statement and pretend that what he meant is that people who build businesses don't deserve credit for them or that they're somehow not theirs. That's not what I'm reading. He might not be a very business-friendly president, but that's still not what he said. He's stating the obvious: Those businesses don't exist without all kinds of other things that others (govt or not) built.

[DonFanucci]

I think you're interpreting it wrong. He's saying that Jeff Bezos can't build Amazon if the postal service and the internet don't exist. So you might be doing amazing things, and they are necessary for success (even if they don't guarantee it), but they are not sufficient, so it makes sense to give back to the system/country that helped you be successful.

 

People fixate on the sentence that stops and then switches back to another idea, but what he's really saying is, you didn't build the bridges and roads and that kind of stuff, the platform on which everything else rests. Without police and military to guarantee your security, without a judicial system and strong institutions that defend property and enforce contracts, without clean water and electricity, etc.. A lot of things simply don't happen even if you're Elon Musk.

 

No, I think you're right. The idea is that you didn't do every single thing that occurred in the process of your success. Therefore, you owe some of your success to other people. You need to give some of your success back to those others- the implication being that it belongs to them and you're returning what is rightfully theirs. It's simply a fact that Amazon wouldn't exist without the internet. Of course no one could dispute that. The idea is that this means Bezos owes a moral debt to the creators of the internet. He owes them a part of his success, and he can help remedy this debt by donating money.

 

Now what I'm saying that this is a perverse reinterpretation of what it means to deserve success. Obama is using 'creation from nothing in a vacuum' as the standard of evaluating whether someone deserves their success. Does Prem Watsa deserve his success? Well, he didn't invent insurance. He didn't invent contract theory. He didn't invent water purification. He had great teachers. You can go on forever.

 

If that's the standard by which to evaluate whether someone deserves success, no one deserves anything. Warren Buffett didn't come up with discounting cash flow theory. By Obama's standard, he better give a huge portion of his money back- after all, what would he have achieved without this knowledge? Elon didn't invent the internet, nor did he invent money. Evaluated against the standard of creation from nothing, Elon barely deserves anything for PayPal. Thankfully, most people still don't evaluate 'earning' by this standard. What allows for Elon to truly deserve his success is not that he created it ex nihilo but that it was achieved because of his choices.

[rkbabang]

But what he is implying is that those things or very similar things couldn't have been built any other way and wouldn't exist otherwise.  Much like a 18th century cotton farmer telling you to thank slavery for your clothing.

We all build on what already exists.  That doesn't diminish someone's accomplishments.

 

Who said it diminishes it? Who said it couldn't have happened otherwise?

 

Recognizing that it was built on an existing foundation, without which it wouldn't have happened, is just recognizing reality.

 

Even in a theoretical libertarian dreamworld utopia, people would still be incredibly interconnected and interdependent and nobody's success would happen in a vacuum on any operation more complex than running a small farm.

 

But people distort that statement and pretend that what he meant is that people who build businesses don't deserve credit for them or that they're somehow not theirs. That's not what I'm reading. He might not be a very business-friendly president, but that's still not what he said. He's stating the obvious: Those businesses don't exist without all kinds of other things that others (govt or not) built.

 

Because it is an asinine thing to say.  It is like telling Einstein that "you didn't think of that" because he could never have come up with relativity if he lived before Newton.  We are all in debt to the guy who invented the wheel, but to tell Ford "you didn't build that" is just a ridiculous thing to say.  And saying it to justify theft  is beyond ridiculous.  Should the family of William Shockley be able to take what they want from me because I make my living designing integrated circuits and I couldn't do that if he hadn't invented the transistor?  And go and then tell me "you didn't build that" to justify their thievery?  It is nonsense.  We all play the deck we are dealt, but we owe nothing but a debt of gratitude to those who came before and paved the way.

 

[rb]

But what he is implying is that those things or very similar things couldn't have been built any other way and wouldn't exist otherwise.  Much like a 18th century cotton farmer telling you to thank slavery for your clothing.

We all build on what already exists.  That doesn't diminish someone's accomplishments.

Yea he didn't dismiss anyone's accomplishments. He simply said that when they've built them on a platform that enabled or made it easier for the people to establish and/or grow their business and some recognition must go to that fact. If anything it was businesses that were dismissing the state's accomplishments that made it easier and more profitable for them to operate and B.O. was drawing attention to that. Of course the statement was taken and twisted to hell.

 

Btw, this very similar to the observation that Buffett made that a lot of his success is owed to the fact that he was born in the US. And if he would have been born in a village in Africa he wouldn't have amounted to much.

 

Now could we have built this platform in another way? Maybe. But we've done it this way and it's worked out pretty good. The fact that because of ideology you don't like how it came to be how it was financed does not deny its existence or its usefulness.

[ScottHall]

I think you guys are talking past each other.

[rkbabang]

I think you guys are talking past each other.

 

I think so.  I agree with every word that he's written, but he doesn't seem to have read what I have wrote.  No one disputes that everything everybody does is built on the accomplishments and infrastructure built by others.  My point is that is not the ONLY thing Obama was saying.  He was saying all that (which is true) and then implying "thus we have a right to tax the hell out of you."  Only he didn't say it like that he used the euphemism "do things together".

 

 

[Liberty]

I think you guys are talking past each other.

 

I think so.  I agree with every word that he's written, but he doesn't seem to have read what I have wrote.  No one disputes that everything everybody does is built on the accomplishments and infrastructure built by others.  My point is that is not the ONLY thing Obama was saying.  He was saying all that (which is true) and then implying "thus we have a right to tax the hell out of you."  Only he didn't say it like that he used the euphemism "do things together".

 

I've read what you wrote. You're just projecting the same fight everywhere, regardless of whether it was actually part of the topic at hand. I wasn't talking about what Obama might have been implying, and he might or might not have been actually implying it in this speech.

 

I was just pointing out that in context, the very famous "you didn't build that" quote is clearly about roads and bridges and things like that, not about "your business", despite the fact that on paper it seems like that because people don't talk the same way they write. They sometimes start a sentence and then think of something they wanted to add to a previous idea, and then go back to what they were saying.

[Liberty]

Because it is an asinine thing to say.  It is like telling Einstein that "you didn't think of that" because he could never have come up with relativity if he lived before Newton. 

 

But that's not what Obama meant in context! If we paraphrase, he might have told Einstein: "You did great! Just don't forget those that helped you get there" which is completely different from your "you didn't think of that".

 

It's a bit stretched here because I'm sure Einstein was aware and didn't need to be reminded, but in our society there are many very successful people who do think they are completely "self-made" and don't owe anyone anything, when that isn't actually true. In fact, most of the most successful people on the planet constantly echo that very sentiment about being born in a place that gave them the opportunity to do what they did and talk about giving back (Buffett, Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc).

[rkbabang]

Because it is an asinine thing to say.  It is like telling Einstein that "you didn't think of that" because he could never have come up with relativity if he lived before Newton. 

 

But that's not what Obama meant in context! If we paraphrase, he might have told Einstein: "You did great! Just don't forget those that helped you get there" which is completely different from your "you didn't think of that".

 

It's a bit stretched here because I'm sure Einstein was aware and didn't need to be reminded, but in our society there are many very successful people who do think they are completely "self-made" and don't owe anyone anything, when that isn't actually true. In fact, most of the most successful people on the planet constantly echo that very sentiment about being born in a place that gave them the opportunity to do what they did and talk about giving back (Buffett, Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc).

 

Do you really think that there is anyone who doesn't understand that we are all standing on the backs of those who came before us all the way back to the first humanoid who picked up a stone or a stick and used it as a tool. And that we are helped by our contemporaries working alongside us in complementary industries, as well as motivated and pushed forward by our competitors?  No one truly believes that they are completely self made in the way you are implying.  Bezos couldn't be dropped on a deserted island without any help and start amazon.com.  He knows that.

I'm sure he also knows that the government isn't the only one who can connect two computers together.  If the internet didn't start out and evolve from the arpanet it would have evolved from something else.  I agree with Kevin Kelly that certain technologies are inevitable and will tend to show up one way or another once all the antecedents are in place.  There  is nothing special about government, we would still have a global network some number of years after the first two computers where networked together in a lab somewhere, we would still have flat surfaces and bridges to drive on if the government didn't fund these things.  In fact we may have had flying cars by now if they didn't.  Subsidies and regulations on existing tech tends to lock in existing technologies and slow change and innovation.  I have no problem giving back as long as it is voluntary.  When someone like Obama says anything about giving back he is using it euphemistically to mean being taken from.