[warwick]

I really don't like the bias in the headline. It seems to imply that coding isn't something you'd do after you got growth.

Why not "How Coding Helps Y Combinator Manage Growth" or "Paul Graham Keeps Coding to Help Y Combinator Keep Growing"?

[philwelch]

I think the implication is that pg would be too busy running YC to code. Even if it doesn't happen to him, it happens to a lot of founders.

[wheels]

I think there are a lot of founders who don't code on their company's product anymore (though it's apparently not a pure factor of size – Gates and Zuckerberg are known for actually writing code many years in), but it'd be weird if they didn't write code at all. It would imply that writing code is never the most efficient way to accomplish a task that they want solved. Even with infinite resources at your beck and call, it's often faster to write a quick script than to explain to someone else what that script should do (and to continue to do so through whatever iterations seem appropriate).

I'm tempted to say that those who don't continue to hack were never really hackers in the first place. For a hacker, writing code is just one of the normal ways to interact with a computer.

[imjk]

I think there's an even more subtle implication that pg is too busy (and should be) to code, yet he still CHOOSES to continue to code. Obviously it would be really easy to find someone to do the coding work - whether keeping up with HN or the creating investor/startup interface - but his choice to continue coding is a statement he and the article are making.

[4ad]

There is a bias with many management and business people, they think coding is low level cruft done by expendable people and once you become a manager or start doing business you start doing the real work and don't have to deal with this lesser things.

Sadly I've seen this a lot. Even more sad is that I know programmers that have become managers, no longer write code, and loathe the days they were simply coders. It pains me.

[a5seo]

The other extreme is people who can never see technical entrepreneurs as anything other than coders.

A week ago I was having coffee with the new VP of Marketing for a company I consult to. Despite my background: MBA 8 years ago, founder of web startup that was acquired, several years in product management prior to that, the veep asked me why I didn't wan to be a programmer. What?

I still code, but I find it annoying when people perceive me as coder first, as though that invalidates my business credentials.

Maybe I'm putting out the wrong vibe, but I'd like to chalk this up to them being threatened by the idea that someone with a skillset they will never have can do all the same stuff they can.

[patrocles]

Despite IBM Growth, Lou Gerstner Still Golfing

[argonz]

When your business outgrow "garage" level it's simply starts to generate MORE and INTERESTING questions than what you could work out yourself, so you just make the decision(give to others) and enjoy the feedback from the results..

It's not that you don't like to code, you just enjoy to be connected and entertained by more stuff.

Of course a great counter example is John Carmack - in there I think he is far more interested in the exact technical details than your average entrepreneur - btw he was never an entrepreneur, he is a "pure" engineer with obsession to optimize(and many other sides of course).

[ez77]

Do you think Sergey and Larry do any significant, production code these these days?

[nkassis]

It's a good question. I'd bet maybe not production code but I'm sure they write some utilities and things for themselves.