4 ms·

> The criticism of Juicero and Theranos being emblematic of focusing on the wrong problems is not sensible. Companies fail, sometimes spectacularly, sometimes d

> The criticism of Juicero and Theranos being emblematic of focusing on the wrong problems is not sensible. Companies fail, sometimes spectacularly, sometimes due to dishonest behavior, etc. If Theranos had the tech they claimed to have, it would have been richly rewarded (outshined only by the consumer surplus it would have created). The problem with Juciero and Theranos isn't that they failed. The problem with them is that Juciero was an immensely dumb idea that was never checked or questioned and thereby wasted tons of money, and Theranos was so unabashedly, obviously mustache-twirlingly evil that if it were used to script an evil corporation for TV, I'd have called it unrealistic (and thereby, it wasted tons of money). They're the worst parts of SV (dumb companies offering things nobody wants at outrageous prices, and obvious evil pretending things are OK because they're 'changing the world' or some other nonsense) exaggerated to near-comical extremes. Silicon Valley's problem is deeper than failing businesses or not enough diversity. It's that the entire enterprise is a bold-faced moneygrab for VCs; ethics, diversity, etc. were never really part of the point, and it's only now that the rest of the world is starting to figure that out. SV's problems are at the core of the reasons for its current existence.

Clubber 9y ago
>The problem with them is that Juciero was an immensely dumb idea that was never checked or questioned and thereby wasted tons of money Like bottled water. The idea of people paying 1600x markup for something they got essentially free while creating massive amounts of waste when sports bottles already existed. When bottled water came out, I remember thinking, "that's a friggin' joke." It sure worked out though.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  There's a difference between ideas that seem dumb and ideas that are dumb. The problem is that Juciero was in the latter category. We didn't have to pour millions of dollars into it to figure that out; do you think the creators of bottled water spent anywhere near that much, or over-engineered their product half as crazily? Put another way, do you imagine that nobody at Nestle or wherever stood up and said "this is a dumb idea" when bottled water was being devised? And how would you imagine the creators of the idea answered that challenge?
  - jklein11 9y ago
    Can you explain to me what this difference is?
    - Clubber 9y ago
      >ideas that seem dumb and ideas that are dumb. The first makes money, the second doesn't. :)
      - balls187 9y ago
        Agreed. There are dumb ideas, and dumb ideas that are poorly executed. Juciero is clearly the latter. But just because an idea is dumb, doesn't mean it won't be successful in the market. Two of my favorite satires on this point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t28ZB1t6gg8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t28ZB1t6gg8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDEL4Ty950Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDEL4Ty950Q
        Clubber 9y ago
        This was hysterical: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9nzwjt/the-colbert-report-vessyl-digital-cup http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9nzwjt/the-colbert-report-vess...
      - taysic 9y ago
        I know people who bought the Juicero so how do you know it didn't have the potential to make money? That is a gamble that is up to investors to decide. A niche product can still be very profitable.
    - 123e1daAdfafsdf 9y ago
      Hindsight. Juicero is so obviously a stupid failure now that we know it is. We can't even imagine a world where it wasn't stupid. Now try to remember a tech/company you thought was stupid that became a massive success. For me, I remember thinking wifi was stupid -- I was a power user, laptops were grossly underpowered circa 1998. Why would anyone need wireless internet on a desktop? I keep that story in mind because it keeps me humble about hindsight bias.
- jwn 9y ago
  Unlike the Juicero, bottled water provides added value in that I can have access to suitable drinking water when I otherwise would be forced to drink tap water. Before someone replies that tap water is perfectly suitable for drinking: Sure it's safe, but I have never had municipal water that didn't taste bad. Never. Maybe I'm just spoiled because I have a well that provides tasteless water.
  - SimbaOnSteroids 9y ago
    St. Louis tap water tastes about the same as bottled water. We can substitute bottled water with premium bottled water and the argument holds though.
  - FireBeyond 9y ago
    Melbourne Australia's water supply is of sufficient quality that they sell, successfully, bottled tap water.
taysic 9y ago
It may have been dumb to you but what does that matter? The point of capitalism is that it's not anyone else's business. Things you may buy may be considered dumb to another. It doesn't matter in a free market where everyone decides for themselves and has their own reasons for what they buy. If it wasted money, that is on the people who invested in it.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  With regards to Juciero, my point isn't "I think it's dumb so it shouldn't exist." It's "many people agree this is dumb and it shouldn't have had money poured into it given it clearly would not survive." It's that Juciero was a capitalistic failure that was treated like a success because Silicon Valley is out-of-touch and self-obsessed. I wouldn't call myself a capitalist, and I have no love for it as a system, but I get how it works. With regards to Theranos, my point also stands. It's baldly evil on its face and shouldn't exist. Capitalism and "it's none of your business" are not excuses.

Clubber 9y ago

>The problem with them is that Juciero was an immensely dumb idea that was never checked or questioned and thereby wasted tons of money Like bottled water. The idea of people paying 1600x markup for something they got essentially free while creating massive amounts of waste when sports bottles already existed. When bottled water came out, I remember thinking, "that's a friggin' joke." It sure worked out though.

ivraatiems 9y ago
There's a difference between ideas that seem dumb and ideas that are dumb. The problem is that Juciero was in the latter category. We didn't have to pour millions of dollars into it to figure that out; do you think the creators of bottled water spent anywhere near that much, or over-engineered their product half as crazily? Put another way, do you imagine that nobody at Nestle or wherever stood up and said "this is a dumb idea" when bottled water was being devised? And how would you imagine the creators of the idea answered that challenge?
- jklein11 9y ago
  Can you explain to me what this difference is?
  - Clubber 9y ago
    >ideas that seem dumb and ideas that are dumb. The first makes money, the second doesn't. :)
    - balls187 9y ago
      Agreed. There are dumb ideas, and dumb ideas that are poorly executed. Juciero is clearly the latter. But just because an idea is dumb, doesn't mean it won't be successful in the market. Two of my favorite satires on this point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t28ZB1t6gg8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t28ZB1t6gg8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDEL4Ty950Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDEL4Ty950Q
      - Clubber 9y ago
        This was hysterical: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9nzwjt/the-colbert-report-vessyl-digital-cup http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9nzwjt/the-colbert-report-vess...
    - taysic 9y ago
      I know people who bought the Juicero so how do you know it didn't have the potential to make money? That is a gamble that is up to investors to decide. A niche product can still be very profitable.
  - 123e1daAdfafsdf 9y ago
    Hindsight. Juicero is so obviously a stupid failure now that we know it is. We can't even imagine a world where it wasn't stupid. Now try to remember a tech/company you thought was stupid that became a massive success. For me, I remember thinking wifi was stupid -- I was a power user, laptops were grossly underpowered circa 1998. Why would anyone need wireless internet on a desktop? I keep that story in mind because it keeps me humble about hindsight bias.
jwn 9y ago
Unlike the Juicero, bottled water provides added value in that I can have access to suitable drinking water when I otherwise would be forced to drink tap water. Before someone replies that tap water is perfectly suitable for drinking: Sure it's safe, but I have never had municipal water that didn't taste bad. Never. Maybe I'm just spoiled because I have a well that provides tasteless water.
- SimbaOnSteroids 9y ago
  St. Louis tap water tastes about the same as bottled water. We can substitute bottled water with premium bottled water and the argument holds though.
- FireBeyond 9y ago
  Melbourne Australia's water supply is of sufficient quality that they sell, successfully, bottled tap water.

taysic 9y ago

It may have been dumb to you but what does that matter? The point of capitalism is that it's not anyone else's business. Things you may buy may be considered dumb to another. It doesn't matter in a free market where everyone decides for themselves and has their own reasons for what they buy. If it wasted money, that is on the people who invested in it.

ivraatiems 9y ago
With regards to Juciero, my point isn't "I think it's dumb so it shouldn't exist." It's "many people agree this is dumb and it shouldn't have had money poured into it given it clearly would not survive." It's that Juciero was a capitalistic failure that was treated like a success because Silicon Valley is out-of-touch and self-obsessed. I wouldn't call myself a capitalist, and I have no love for it as a system, but I get how it works. With regards to Theranos, my point also stands. It's baldly evil on its face and shouldn't exist. Capitalism and "it's none of your business" are not excuses.