Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Exception that proves the rule" requires the example to be notable specifically because the example violates the rule. In this case, the East India Company is not notable because it was long-lived.


I understood the point to be that they were exceptional because they were arms of governments.


I think they were extensions of the state, not the government.


It certainly is notable for its longevity, outliving most of today's companies. And there is a good reason for that longevity: its special arrangement with the crown.


Yes, and the rule parent initially stated was "Pretty much all businesses used to be basically ephemeral until about 150 years ago".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: