Actually, you're wrong. Many languages (and other technologies) are versatile and can do different things, so they're not as important here. What is needed are people who know how to design and build the product/prototype, and leave them to decide which technology to use.

I am not talking from a "Hacker News" perspective here, where we can debate the details of functional programming or talk about which language makes the most sense. I am speaking of conversations (that I've actually had, on a regular basis) that go like this:

Me: So do you plan on building that as a web app, or a mobile app?

Non-technical founder: Um. I don't know. Both?

Me: Okay, do you understand that you will probably need at least 2 different developers (and possibly 3 or more, depending on which mobile app platforms you use) to help you build that out?

NTF: It's a great idea! I just need a developer! Don't you know some developers you can introduce me to?

Me: ...

The conversation is on an entirely different level from most of the ones we'd have here.

It's not a "Hacker News perspective", it's the basic principle of anything. If you have a car and want to take a ride, you need a driver or you'll crash. If we're talking about a non-technical founder starting a tech startup, the first advice to the is only one: find a technical co-founder and don't even think about starting it without them. What you're describing should be the job for that technical co-founder, and not for our non-tech guy (or gal) to do. Unless they are also willing to learn enough to become technical enough to play that role too; that takes a lot of time and effort to do right, but it's a viable route too.

So, next time you have a conversation like the one above, don't waste your time on trying to teach tech stuff to non-tech people -- simply, just tell them "find a tech co-founder".

Actually you're wrong. (Sorry, but I just felt the need the illustrate the obnoxiousness of your original reply).

I have to side with Erica on this one for the simple reason that you'll never be able to attract a good developer or a technical co-founder with this attitude of throwing your hands up in the air and eyes glazing over. That doesn't mean that you ignorantly blunder in and tell developers how to do their job, but it means that whatever area your company needs to move in you are keen to learn enough to have an intelligent conversation about it.

I've met dozens (hundreds?) of wantrepreneurs with this attitude of not wanting to know anything about the tech, and invariably they see themselves as brilliant masterminds who just need a peon to execute their vision. Little do they realize that the success of any tech company depends on bridging the gap between the technical execution and the business reality. I am much less turned off by a business guy who is ignorant but trying to learn about tech versus someone who feels they can start a tech company without learning anything about technology.

Both you and Erica are correct in identifying the problem with the attitude; but trying to teach them technology is wrong. Or, if you find that word too obnoxious, a waste of time and effort.

My point is: if someone is willing to learn, teach them what to look for. If they're not, ignore them.

So we're in agreement. :-)

all you've done now is change the question from 'what kind of developer do you want to find' to 'what kind of co-founder do you want to find'.

Or would you tell someone to trust their gut and blindly pickup a 'technical' cofounder?

No, I would tell them to talk to as many technical people as possible, and look for one who proves able to:

a) understand their vision b) improve on their vision c) get some respect from other technical people

With a) being the crucial step, and if they can't get past that there might be a problem with their vision.

The conversation you are describing is not a non-technical founder...its a non-anything dreamer.

I dont think lack of technical knowledge is this guys problem. His problem is that he has an idea and thinks other people are going to do everything for him.

A founder would not be looking for a developer at this stage. They would be looking for a customer at this stage and map out their needs and flesh out the idea.

Notice that nowhere in that conversation did you mention choice of language.

Additionally, the correct answer is "Find a good technical co-founder, or spend money on good consultants, and let them figure out the rest and explain their decisions afterwards to you."

The problem with your answer is that nontechnical people will never be able to hire technical people well. They simply do not have the skills to judge technical talent; at best they can hire based on secondary characteristics like "they really sound like they know what they are talking about". Nontechnical founders who successfully hire good tech talent are just lucky.

I think this same maxim goes for tech people trying to hire sales talent, or nonfinance hiring a CFO, etc. You're just not equipped to judge, and you don't have the time to take CPA classes (or learn to code, or get an MBA, etc) just to hire someone.

The situation is not really this grim, because you should have a social network which can help vet hiring choices - either because the candidate is already known, or because you know someone that can do the interview for you. But "knowing people who can help you hire" is not really a skill.

I think you're right, but it's more nuanced. Nontechnical people can be very helpful early in the recruiting funnel though, and that's a critical time suck/skillset that the technical folks don't have to invest in and can instead focus on their core role.

Is it really necessary for a non-technical founder to understand the differences between node.js and C#/.NET?

"I know bridges can be built out of metal or wood! I'll just hire a carpenter and let them figure it out..."

This should be:

I know bridges can be built out of metal or wood! I'll just hire an engineer and let them figure it out.

Which is great, because that's exactly what the engineer knows how to do. This should be the same case with the technical co-founder, if not, they're the wrong person to choose as your technical co-founder.

Anybody qualified to be CTO of a company should be able to asses the needs of the software, architect the solution, get up to speed on any technologies they're not yet familiar with, and implement the solution.

That depends on what the idea is. If you're selling software and you're a founder, you'd better at least want to understand your product or you are useless.

Understanding the product doesn't require to know in what language it has been built (unless you're selling a library that can be called from a certain language but I don't think that the kind of product we have in mind here). What you say is akin to a car salesman knowing how the car factory works.

I don't think so. I think it's more akin to the CEO of Toyota having an idea how the car factory works and I bet you money he has a pretty good idea.

Frameworks and languages have a part in defining the structure of the organization, how development grows, how people's work is measured, and so on. It will ultimately have a significant role in office politics. Once a company scales past 25-100 people, developer politics will be there to stay regardless of language. So you have to pick what kind of trade offs you want to deal with. And a founder should be the informed final word on that crucial choice