4 ms·

That implies: (a) we know what comes next (b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on (c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us

by zaidf 16y ago

That implies: (a) we know what comes next (b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on (c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us achieve (a) Counter: (a) we don't really know what comes next (b) heck, we don't really know what all stuff folks are working on. Just because there are two well-known start-ups called Twitter and Facebook does not mean there aren't dozens of start-ups doing stuff with hardware and medicine. Don't blame the media's love affair with Twitter and Facebook to entrepreneurs not working on challenging stuff. (c) Lastly, these things the author sees as play may very well have a key role in solving the problems of tomorrow. If we distract people with the lure of easy money... The dot-com bubble ended a long time ago.

rblion 16y ago
A.) It's called intuition for a reason. No one in the current paradigm sees the next one out, except maybe the brave scientist or artist who is peering over the horizon. B.) He or I never said there aren't ANY startups that are solving real problems, just that most are starting out chasing the shallow end of potential. Much of it can be attributed to people having to find a way to survive in a rapidly changing world. C.) You can use all the rhetoric you want, the bottom line is: the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value.
- zaidf 16y ago
  ...the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value. Please explain how in the early days of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs you'd know that they were going to help humanity? The whole heal-the-planet argument is very different from do-something-challenging. You and the author of the article seem to be confusing the two. Which one do you really want more entrepreneurs to work on? Even in hindsight, it would be hard to see how the top 50 of Valley from the 60s and 70s were helping the planet heal. Other than Bill Gates, everyone else is pretty up in the air as far them contributing to our planet. And even Bill G, it wasn't until he made all that money and decided to give it all away that he truly started having impact. Now you can sight examples of how the iPod saved a life here and there and how Windows gave rise to the tech revolution etc...in which case, I'd counter that Facebook and Twitter have just as much potential and are in their very early days.
  - rblion 16y ago
    1.) They are not different at all. We have to 'do something' to fix our civilization's problems or 'heal our planet'. That doing part is where startups come into the picture. 2.) You ever read Steve Wozniack's autobiography? If you haven't, you don't know the full story. They believed a PC could do a lot more than just crunch numbers, it could realize creative and scientific potential. Steve J. believed computers were 'bicycles for the mind'. To this day, Apple is still focused on creating hardware and software that make life simpler and allows people to create easier. Whether they do or not, is all up to them... 3.) Bill G is not the only one, he is just the most famous one. This generation will yield many more scientists inspired to create technology that serves Earth.
    - zaidf 16y ago
      They believed a PC could do a lot more than just crunch numbers, it could realize creative and scientific potential. Steve J. believed computers were 'bicycles for the mind'. You seen the slide decks or talked to the founders in the Valley? If you are going on vision, trust me, today's founders are not short on it. Now, how good of a job the founders are doing in bringing their vision to life? We don't know and won't know for a while. At best, we should hold judgement IMO. This generation will yield many more scientists inspired to create technology that serves Earth. May be. But that could also mean that you no longer need to be a scientist to build something that serves earth. You could just be some econ grad who gets an idea for a micro-lending site and launches Kiva. Also, it's unfair that you see Facebook's mission of connecting people or Twitter's role during emergencies in a different realm to Apple making computing simpler.
      - rblion 16y ago
        You're putting words in my mouth. You should work for Rolling Stone or TechCrunch. They solve problems or they wouldn't be relevant. Don't over analyze words and miss the essence of what's being said. All I am saying is... There are great entrepreneurs...the few who look beyond the existing paradigm and beyond personal gain to advance humanity as a whole with their discoveries, models, and products. Edison, Ford, Jobs, Knight etc... And there are good entrepreneurs...the rest who make widgets inside what the great entrepreneurs made, they usually think too much to create anything revolutionary. You run into a few of these every day in every city. and... I don't know the author that well or care to either, this particular article was just well written and made a valid point. Some priorities need to shifted around...
maxawaytoolong 16y ago
The dot com bubble is back. You can get seed funding to the tune of 3/4 of a million dollars for any mediocre idea right now. If that is proving hard to accomplish in Silicon Valley, move your operations to NYC, where there is more money and the investors will invest in anything.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Yes, and hopefully it won't last too long. You just know the silly money is flowing again when you look at some of the stuff that gets funded and the amounts that are thrown at it. It's sad, really that lessons from the past do not seem to stay learned, this cycle of extreme waste followed by extreme frugality isn't good for anybody.

by zaidf 16y ago

rblion 16y ago

A.) It's called intuition for a reason. No one in the current paradigm sees the next one out, except maybe the brave scientist or artist who is peering over the horizon. B.) He or I never said there aren't ANY startups that are solving real problems, just that most are starting out chasing the shallow end of potential. Much of it can be attributed to people having to find a way to survive in a rapidly changing world. C.) You can use all the rhetoric you want, the bottom line is: the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value.

zaidf 16y ago
...the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value. Please explain how in the early days of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs you'd know that they were going to help humanity? The whole heal-the-planet argument is very different from do-something-challenging. You and the author of the article seem to be confusing the two. Which one do you really want more entrepreneurs to work on? Even in hindsight, it would be hard to see how the top 50 of Valley from the 60s and 70s were helping the planet heal. Other than Bill Gates, everyone else is pretty up in the air as far them contributing to our planet. And even Bill G, it wasn't until he made all that money and decided to give it all away that he truly started having impact. Now you can sight examples of how the iPod saved a life here and there and how Windows gave rise to the tech revolution etc...in which case, I'd counter that Facebook and Twitter have just as much potential and are in their very early days.
- rblion 16y ago
  1.) They are not different at all. We have to 'do something' to fix our civilization's problems or 'heal our planet'. That doing part is where startups come into the picture. 2.) You ever read Steve Wozniack's autobiography? If you haven't, you don't know the full story. They believed a PC could do a lot more than just crunch numbers, it could realize creative and scientific potential. Steve J. believed computers were 'bicycles for the mind'. To this day, Apple is still focused on creating hardware and software that make life simpler and allows people to create easier. Whether they do or not, is all up to them... 3.) Bill G is not the only one, he is just the most famous one. This generation will yield many more scientists inspired to create technology that serves Earth.
  - zaidf 16y ago
    They believed a PC could do a lot more than just crunch numbers, it could realize creative and scientific potential. Steve J. believed computers were 'bicycles for the mind'. You seen the slide decks or talked to the founders in the Valley? If you are going on vision, trust me, today's founders are not short on it. Now, how good of a job the founders are doing in bringing their vision to life? We don't know and won't know for a while. At best, we should hold judgement IMO. This generation will yield many more scientists inspired to create technology that serves Earth. May be. But that could also mean that you no longer need to be a scientist to build something that serves earth. You could just be some econ grad who gets an idea for a micro-lending site and launches Kiva. Also, it's unfair that you see Facebook's mission of connecting people or Twitter's role during emergencies in a different realm to Apple making computing simpler.
    - rblion 16y ago
      You're putting words in my mouth. You should work for Rolling Stone or TechCrunch. They solve problems or they wouldn't be relevant. Don't over analyze words and miss the essence of what's being said. All I am saying is... There are great entrepreneurs...the few who look beyond the existing paradigm and beyond personal gain to advance humanity as a whole with their discoveries, models, and products. Edison, Ford, Jobs, Knight etc... And there are good entrepreneurs...the rest who make widgets inside what the great entrepreneurs made, they usually think too much to create anything revolutionary. You run into a few of these every day in every city. and... I don't know the author that well or care to either, this particular article was just well written and made a valid point. Some priorities need to shifted around...

maxawaytoolong 16y ago

The dot com bubble is back. You can get seed funding to the tune of 3/4 of a million dollars for any mediocre idea right now. If that is proving hard to accomplish in Silicon Valley, move your operations to NYC, where there is more money and the investors will invest in anything.

jacquesm 16y ago
Yes, and hopefully it won't last too long. You just know the silly money is flowing again when you look at some of the stuff that gets funded and the amounts that are thrown at it. It's sad, really that lessons from the past do not seem to stay learned, this cycle of extreme waste followed by extreme frugality isn't good for anybody.