5 ms·
The author conflates several things into the label "SV": the private capital, the founders, the startup execs and so on. but surprisingly it barely mentions the
by relyio 9y ago
The author conflates several things into the label "SV": the private capital, the founders, the startup execs and so on. but surprisingly it barely mentions the engineers that are perhaps SV's most defining characteristic.
Now to address the article, the current ecosystem of companies in SV and the people it attracts is the byproduct of what venture capitalists are willing to invest in, which is itself a consequence of what the economy wants and the kind of ventures regulators allow to succeed.
So, if you want to point fingers asking why aren't tough problems solved you should start by asking yourself why is it that those are so much more capital-intensive to solve in the first place. And more importantly, what could be done to make them more attractive to private capital.
Of course, there's a narrow category of problems that are intrinsically capital intense. But many more are just artificial moonshots i.e problems that aren't that hard if not for the many roadblocks and hoops one would need to go through to formulate even a basic answer.
How long would it take to get a railroad network going in 2017 v. 1830s?
tl;dr: the entities influencing the incentive structure are more to blame than the individual agents trying to optimize for their own KPIs.
- justinhj 9y agoYour railroad question made me think... back in 1830s there was a huge need by both the public and industry for a railroad network. These days transport is a mess in some ways but it’s not a huge need for anyone. On the other hand the issues of what can we use smart phones for, what should social networks look like and how to advertise on these new mediums were actual problems of our day that companies and engineers had to solve. Hopefully we can move on to more interesting problems soon though.
- lovich 9y agoThere's also just more things in the way. It may have been difficult to tunnel through a mountain but it's several times more difficult now to both deal with getting the rights to land with all the people in your path _and_ tunnel through the mountain
- Karrot_Kream 9y agoI don't think that was the point of the article. If we take a look at the structure of the Valley, and point the finger at Venture Capitalists, then what we really need to ask is why Venture Capitalists brand themselves as revolutionary do-gooders when the movers of capital in the finance industry don't. It's become an almost Orwellian caricature. > So, if you want to point fingers asking why aren't tough problems solved you should start by asking yourself why is it that those are so much more capital-intensive to solve in the first place. And more importantly, what could be done to make them more attractive to private capital. I think this is a convenient way of oversimplifying the issue. The issue at its most fundamental is why VC does not invest as frequently in issues that help the middle-class. The explanation could have a variety of reasons, from corrupt VCs, to a broken incentive system (our implementation of capitalism), all the way to artificial bureaucratic inflation (inefficient/corrupt government). There's no need to worship at the altar of capitalism until we strangle ourselves in our zealotry.