ryancarson

We spent a lot of time testing and discussing if it was the right call to make Gemini 3 our default model in Amp. We've never chosen a new model on launch day before, however we were very impressed with the performance and intelligence. There are some pretty low lows however, so it's not a perfect experience. We're monitoring it very closely.

Yes, there linked at the bottom of the page:

https://github.com/snarktank/founder-gpts

I've added the CFO. Is that what you're looking for?

https://ollamahub.com/m/snarktank/your-cfo:latest

Looking forward to see if this helps other founders.

Nick is a quality human. Well deserved.

Thank you

> when Carson and others like him give themselves no credit for their success, then there is nothing we can learn from them.

That's the whole point of the post. There aren't any quick tips, todos or silver bullets I can give you that will help you. The post isn't meant to be ultimately affirming. It's just reality as I see it.

> Summary: Hey, I run an awesome company and look at my face on this magazine.

I'm sorry that's your takeaway. I've failed to communicate to you the reason I wrote it.

Fair point - revenue is just a way to speak about size. Amongst my CEO friends, yearly revenue is used as the blunt measurement of the size of business.

I would say there's some validity to the fact that each step can build on the previous. I almost laugh when I think about how little I knew back in 2004 about the mechanics, tactics and financing of startups. However, that knowledge wasn't the limiting factor. It was the idea.

I think that was either a huge compliment, or a terrible slight, but I can't quite figure out which one :)

The reason I pity people who are passionate about power or money is because I have experienced much greater happiness in loving and being loved, unconditionally. The strongest of those loves are from my wife, my kids, my sisters and my mom and dad. None of those folks love me because of power or money.

I've had a couple things that would demonstrate me having money like a super expensive watch, a brand new Audi, a big house, etc. They were great for getting fleeting "Wow, he's got money!" glances from folks. Then I realized their like for me was related to stuff, not me. It just all seemed very vacuous.

It seems like I have some sort of in-built desire to do something that 'matters'. The only way I have to measure this is 'number of lives changed'.

Just keep doing the best you can. If you don't have what appears to be a world-changing idea right now, you still are providing value by creating jobs and offering value to your customers. I didn't know I was going to create Treehouse until it happened. Hindsight is always 20-20.

> I've heard the following advice frequently amongst non-tech entrepreneurs: aim your first exit for a million, then 10 million, then aim for the home runs.

This idea seems laughable to me. As if you can perfectly time and control those outcomes. Ha! :)

I'm lucky that I could refine my skills through those first three businesses. If Treehouse was my first big idea, I'd have no choice. I'd just have to do the best I could.

> What changed when you did treehouse vs those other smaller businesses? Was it the fact that you didn't need to worry about money in the short-term anymore (because of those small exits), or something else?

I didn't make quite enough from those exits to be financially independent, so I still need to make Treehouse work from a money perspective personally.

The simple thing that changed was the scope of the idea. It was world-changing scale - millions of potential lives affected.

Thanks for the kind words

> the ones that succeeded were lucky, and we were just lucky enough to be able to take advantage of that luck.

Amen. Amen.

I'd love to hear more about your past adventures. What were the large companies and the failed/tiny ones?

That's why I chose my definition carefully. Being able to raise capital is determined by a lot of things that unfortunately, you cannot control.

This is one of the reasons I'm so passionate about Treehouse. We can empower more people with the skills to build their first product, without raising capital. Once they have a working product, they're much more likely to be able to raise capital.

I pity someone who is 'passionate' about those things.

You should blog about it!

I like that definition :)

Interesting that you were at Google. What did you do there?

I'm just finishing "I'm Feeling Lucky" about Google's early days.

I don't think "focus on getting lucky" is quite right either.

I didn't sift through all the available opportunities and choose changing education. I was personally interested in this problem - it mattered to me on an emotional level. I've interviewed Evan Williams and Mark Zuckerberg personally and I see the same pattern there.

It kind of sucks to say "You just need to be interested personally in solving a problem" but it's true. I don't think you can simply identify a problem and solve it, without the personal passion.

I hadn't thought about how these cons might also apply to large traditionally managed companies. Thx.

> BTW, apparently there are citation-like watermarks when copy-pasting from the blog post - this isn't a big deal, but I don't see any particular benefit to anyone from this... Ryan, if you're reading, may I humbly suggest you reconsider this?

Nimi, I think Tumblr does that. Sorry.

Sure, please shoot me an email ryan @ teamtreehouse

Yes, please shoot me an email ryan @ teamtreehouse

Thank you!

We all have breaks throughout the day