Retail

The 'LARP' Phenomenon: Authenticity in the Tech Startup World

In the fast-paced world of technology startups, a new term has emerged from the lexicon of live-action role-playing to critique a particular type of founder: the 'LARPer.' This term, initially associated with costumed participants in imaginative scenarios, has been repurposed to describe individuals in the tech sphere who appear to be more focused on performing the role of a founder rather than genuinely embodying it. These 'LARPing' founders are often characterized by their conspicuous displays of work ethic and networking, frequently leveraging social media to project an image of success and influence, while potentially neglecting the core demands of building a sustainable business. This trend has sparked considerable discussion and concern among established figures in the startup community, who advocate for a return to earnest effort and true innovation over performative displays.

The Ascent of 'LARP' in Tech Discourse

The term 'LARP,' an acronym for Live Action Role-Playing, has undergone a significant transformation, moving from niche hobbyist circles into the mainstream vocabulary of the tech industry. Initially, LARP involved individuals immersing themselves in fictional worlds, often in elaborate costumes, to collectively enact stories. However, the internet's pervasive influence has reshaped its meaning, evolving it into a descriptor for those perceived as 'posers' or 'fakers.' In the dynamic realm of startups, 'LARP' has now become a critical label for founders who seem to prioritize the performative aspects of entrepreneurship—such as public declarations of their demanding work schedules or their elite social connections—over the tangible, often arduous, work of acquiring customers and developing their ventures. This shift reflects a growing concern within the tech community about the authenticity of leadership and the potential for superficiality to overshadow genuine progress.

Prominent figures within the tech ecosystem have publicly addressed this phenomenon. Garry Tan, the CEO of Y Combinator, a renowned startup accelerator, has issued a direct admonition: "Be earnest, don't larp." This statement underscores a call for sincerity and substance in entrepreneurship. Similarly, Des Traynor, cofounder of Intercom, a customer messaging platform, conveyed a stark warning in a September email, emphasizing the finite nature of life and advising against squandering it on merely "LARPing as a startup founder for followers."

The archetypal 'founder-influencer' is increasingly visible, blurring the lines between legitimate marketing efforts and exaggerated self-promotion. Questions arise about the true intent behind posts detailing grueling work hours—are they genuine reflections of dedication, or are they a form of 'grindslop,' a term that critiques performative hustle culture? Christian Di Bratto has outlined several characteristics of a 'LARPing' founder, including frequent LinkedIn posts about working long hours while simultaneously demonstrating excessive screen time on social media platforms, or adhering rigidly to the teachings of influential tech personalities like Paul Graham. Even Graham himself has acknowledged the difficulty in identifying these individuals, particularly among younger entrepreneurs where inexperience can often be mistaken for performative behavior.

Google search trends for the term 'LARP' have seen a remarkable surge, indicating a 200% year-over-year increase in interest. This spike highlights the growing relevance and discussion surrounding the concept. During a July session at YC Startup School, Garry Tan directly questioned Sam Altman about accusations of 'LARPing' within Y Combinator. Altman, initially perplexed by the specific application of the term to YC, eventually deflected the conversation towards general criticisms from 'haters on Twitter,' suggesting a broader societal issue rather than an internal YC problem.

The act of 'cosplaying' as a founder is not an entirely novel concept in Silicon Valley; some might even argue that figures like Elizabeth Holmes epitomized this performative aspect long before the term gained traction. However, the current landscape is significantly shaped by the amplified reach of social media marketing. As product designer Alec Freese aptly put it, many 'founders' today might be more accurately classified as 'content creators.' This sentiment is echoed by others who express frustration with founders lacking genuine drive, more interested in appearing busy than in actual achievement.

The current market dynamics, particularly the fervor surrounding artificial intelligence, also contribute to the rise of 'LARPing.' With AI startups securing unprecedented funding rounds, the tech environment presents a highly attractive, almost theatrical, stage for aspiring entrepreneurs. As Aditya Prasad, an engineer at Silna Health, observed, the competitive nature of leading AI firms like Anthropic might inadvertently push less genuinely driven individuals to 'LARP' in less demanding sectors, creating a visible divide in commitment and authenticity.

The pervasive discussion around 'LARPing' in the tech world serves as a critical reflection on authenticity and substance in an era often dominated by digital facades. It prompts founders and investors alike to scrutinize motivations, distinguish genuine innovation from mere showmanship, and ultimately, strive for a culture where true value creation takes precedence over performative displays.

Miss USA's Modern Approach to Pageantry: Fan Engagement and Revenue Generation

The Miss USA pageant, a long-standing tradition, is currently navigating a period of transformation, introducing innovative strategies like audience participation through voting and the sale of unique packages to reshape its competitive landscape and financial model.

Reinventing Pageantry: Fan Influence and Commercial Endeavors

The Era of Interactive Voting: How Audience Participation Shapes Outcomes

During the recent Miss USA competition, the Miami theater, illuminated like a rock concert, became a hub of digital activity as a QR code appeared. Spectators, including families and former beauty queens, eagerly pointed their phones at the large barcode, ready to cast their votes. A twelve-minute countdown began, prompting rapid engagement from the audience and home viewers alike. Participants could use a complimentary vote or purchase bundles, priced from $50 for 50 votes to $500 for 500 votes. The leaderboard dynamically updated, showing contestants' progress in real time. In the final two minutes, votes were doubled, leading to a dramatic surge in support. The margin between the top two contestants, initially 1,794 votes with 36 seconds remaining, expanded to over 14,000 by the end of the voting period.

From Broadcast to Digital: Adapting to a Changing Media Landscape

With dwindling network television viewership—down from nearly 40 million in its prime to 1.1 million on The CW in 2023—Miss USA faces a new reality. The pageant's licensing fees, once ranging from $3 to $5 million, have significantly decreased. After The CW dropped the show shortly before the 2026 final, it moved to the Queen Beauty Network, a streaming service where CEO Thom Brodeur also serves as vice president. The 2026 final, which saw Justus Kelley become the first married woman and mother to win, attracted around 4,000 live viewers on the new platform. Brodeur emphasizes the need for new revenue streams, including fan voting and other unique opportunities, to ensure the pageant's future for decades to come, acknowledging that the days of free access for pageants are over.

The Financial Aspect of Competing: Accessibility Concerns and Entrepreneurial Spirit

Participating in Miss USA is a costly endeavor, with contestants reporting expenses ranging from $3,000 to $50,000. Critics, such as Miss Arizona Kaitlyn Humphrey, worry that the increased financial demands, including paid voting, create a barrier for many aspiring contestants, turning the competition into a "pay-to-play" model. However, CEO Brodeur views these investments as comparable to those in any competitive sport, asserting that costs are inherent in creating such opportunities. He contends that the new model, which includes fan voting and sales incentives, enables the industry to thrive by fostering new revenue streams and engagement.

Innovative Fan Engagement: The Open Casting Call and Its Impact

Traditionally, contestants earn their spot in Miss USA by winning state pageants. However, due to vacant state director positions, CEO Brodeur introduced an open casting call for the 2025 and 2026 pageants, allowing women from any state to apply. The 2026 process incorporated multiple rounds of fan voting, where participants could use free daily votes or purchase bundles. This generated mixed reactions; some, like Amber Uhler, found it exciting and engaging, while others, like Malory Hudson, experienced significant anxiety due to the continuous need for campaigning and financial support. Brodeur defended the system, highlighting that a large percentage of winners advanced primarily through free votes, and likened the process to influencers monetizing their content, emphasizing fan participation as a key driver.

The People's Choice Award: Expanding Fan Influence and Debate

Beyond the open casting call, contestants also participated in the People's Choice voting, allowing fans to support their favorite among all 51 Miss USA 2026 participants. Historically, pageants reserved one semifinal spot for fan favorites, but Brodeur expanded this to three spots, leading to both increased fan involvement and controversy. While some contestants appreciated the expanded opportunity for fan influence, others, like Miss Kansas Madilynn Becker and Miss California Acacia McBride, expressed concerns about the "pay-to-play" aspect, wishing for a system based purely on merit and free voting. Brodeur affirmed the decision, noting that fan votes accounted for 14% of the overall score in the top 10 selection, and revealed that fan voting generated significant revenue, which contributed to increased cash prizes for top contestants and a higher salary for the Miss USA winner, effectively balancing the financial investment.

Unconventional Pathways to Success: The Westgate Resorts Partnership

In a bold move to generate additional revenue and engagement, Miss USA introduced an incentive where one top 20 spot was awarded to the contestant who sold the most Westgate Resorts vacation packages. This initiative, launched in partnership with Westgate Resorts, allowed contestants to sell two-night stays for $99. Miss Montana Lisbeth Fernández, who sold nearly 200 packages, embraced this opportunity, viewing it as a chance to secure a significant career opportunity with Westgate. While some contestants appreciated this alternative path to advancement, others, including former Miss USA Shandi Finnessey, questioned its alignment with the pageant's traditional image, arguing that a Miss USA should be a spokeswoman, not a salesperson. Brodeur, however, maintained that being a brand ambassador and salesperson is part of the modern Miss USA role, and defended the increased ticket prices for the event by comparing them to high-demand entertainment events, aiming to elevate the Miss USA brand for a new era.

See More

The AI Assistant: A Manager's New Frontier or a Human Touch Substitute?

In an intriguing experiment, an employee delved into the capabilities of artificial intelligence by attempting to replace her human manager with an AI chatbot. This endeavor, born from a period of increasing AI-driven job displacements, sought to determine if an AI counterpart could truly replicate the multifaceted role of a human boss. The results offered a nuanced perspective, highlighting AI's strengths in analytical and routine tasks, but ultimately underscoring its limitations in areas demanding creativity, interpersonal understanding, and the intricate dynamics of a professional environment. This exploration sheds light on the evolving landscape of management in an AI-integrated workplace.

The genesis of this unconventional experiment traces back to a conversation between the author and her editor, Ryan Kailath, amidst growing concerns about AI's impact on employment. Kailath, willing to be the subject of this journalistic inquiry, collaborated with the author to create "RyanBot" using ChatGPT's Codex. The AI was meticulously configured with two comprehensive instruction manuals: one detailing Kailath's communication style and professional ethos, and the other outlining his managerial approach, including his emphasis on encouraging reporters to advocate for their ideas. For a period of four months, the author submitted story ideas, messages, questions, and drafts to both her human boss and RyanBot, meticulously comparing their responses.

The experiment quickly evolved beyond a simple task comparison, delving into a philosophical examination of the essence of management. While the author initially saw potential in RyanBot's ability to swiftly process information and provide feedback, she soon realized the irreplaceable value of her human manager's nuanced skills. RyanBot, despite its detailed programming, exhibited an overwhelming desire to be helpful, often offering to perform tasks that should have remained the author's responsibility, such as rewriting pitches or brainstorming ideas. This "people-pleasing" tendency, a common characteristic of AI designed for engagement, contrasted sharply with the human manager's approach of guiding and challenging the employee to refine their own work. The AI's inability to offer critical, constructive feedback, or to discern genuinely interesting ideas from less promising ones, became a significant drawback.

Moreover, RyanBot struggled with tasks requiring creativity and humor. When presented with a humorous opening line for a story about New Yorkers' commuting habits, the AI's suggestions were bland and uninspired, lacking the wit and contextual understanding of its human counterpart. Its attempts to draft an entire story were met with similar criticism, producing text that was unengaging and devoid of human insight. This highlighted a fundamental gap in AI's capacity for creative thought and subjective judgment, skills crucial for effective editorial guidance.

Despite these shortcomings, RyanBot did demonstrate utility in specific areas. It excelled at the meticulous analysis of data, quickly scrutinizing coding methodologies and sample sizes in a way that a human might take longer to process. It also provided valuable line-by-line grammar and clarity edits, and on one occasion, correctly identified the optimal placement of a crucial data point within a story, mirroring the human editor's judgment. These instances showcased AI's potential as a powerful tool for supporting analytical and technical aspects of editorial work.

However, the most significant revelation from the experiment was RyanBot's complete lack of understanding regarding office politics and human interpersonal dynamics. It lacked awareness of colleagues, organizational structures, or the subtle nuances of workplace hierarchy. This meant it couldn't offer strategic advice on who to pitch a story to, or how to navigate complex internal issues. While this detachment allowed it to question assignments that came from higher up, it simultaneously prevented it from grasping the broader organizational context, stakeholder needs, and the inherent obligations of a team. Unlike a human manager who balances the strength of an idea with its practical implications within the company, RyanBot could only assess the idea in isolation. Feedback from Kailath's other human reports further confirmed this, describing the bot's responses as knowledgeable but lacking the institutional memory and contextual understanding of a seasoned human manager. Ultimately, RyanBot itself acknowledged its limitations, stating, "I do not replace the actual combination of newsroom context, trust, taste, institutional memory, and accountability that a real editor brings."

This experiment powerfully illustrates that while artificial intelligence offers remarkable efficiency in data processing and rule-based tasks, the intricate tapestry of human management remains largely beyond its grasp. The nuanced abilities of critical thinking, creative problem-solving, emotional intelligence, and a deep understanding of organizational culture are still uniquely human attributes. These findings suggest a future where AI serves as a powerful assistant, augmenting human capabilities, rather than a wholesale replacement for the indispensable human element in leadership and management.

See More