5 ms·

Classic modern HN comment. The hard working person with a history of success who is trying a risky ambitious project will fail, because they didn't consider the

Classic modern HN comment. The hard working person with a history of success who is trying a risky ambitious project will fail, because they didn't consider the few things a commentor instantly spotted as problems.

curiousllama 6y ago
Yea, that's fair. I should - I do! - commend the effort. Some good things here: (1) It's good to try to solve problems. (2) There is a shortage of tech talent in the country (3) Eric Schmidt is very smart. Sure as heck smarter than me. Still - from my admittedly-limited vantage point, I can name a four people with degrees in public policy and CS (or similar) that tried and failed to get good jobs in government, so they took $150k+ tech jobs in the private sector instead. So seeing someone saying "the problem with government tech is one of pipeline" is jarring to say the least.
- natalyarostova 6y ago
  :)
MattGaiser 6y ago
It is not a few things, but rather one of the core reasons governments cannot do technology well.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
zjaffee 6y ago
Except in the world of education there's been a substantial amount of people without their own direct experience in the field who've put out claims that they can materially change things when they have been completely unable to do so time and time again. I do see value for an institution described as such in this post, but much more on the research side of things with a secondary focus on should a new branch of the military be established to focus specifically on cyber issues, such an institution could become valuable in the same vain as something like west point.
TheCoelacanth 6y ago
You could flip it around and say that the commenter is the exact type of person that Schmidt needs to sell on this idea for it to be a success (people who would study tech and then go work for the government) and they aren't buying it. Schmidt failed to consider the perspective of one of the key stakeholders in the area he's trying to change. His idea would get laughed out of the room if he wasn't already a billionaire.
- mav3rick 6y ago
  Most ideas in history were laughed at.
mbesto 6y ago
Classic modern HN comment response. You act like these criticisms are somehow inherently negative... Just because people love to point out the HN discussion where Drew Houston got scrutiny for Dropbox, doesn't mean that discussion isn't valuable. I'm sure as hell Drew learned a ton from the criticisms. This is the point of HN - it's OK.
- natalyarostova 6y ago
  Maybe you're right. I felt the over-confident claim that it would fail to make it cross the line. If we discourage people from trying 1/100 or even 1/1000 chances because it's overwhelmingly likely they fail, we miss out on the massive upside offered by these risks.

curiousllama 6y ago

Yea, that's fair. I should - I do! - commend the effort. Some good things here: (1) It's good to try to solve problems. (2) There is a shortage of tech talent in the country (3) Eric Schmidt is very smart. Sure as heck smarter than me. Still - from my admittedly-limited vantage point, I can name a four people with degrees in public policy and CS (or similar) that tried and failed to get good jobs in government, so they took $150k+ tech jobs in the private sector instead. So seeing someone saying "the problem with government tech is one of pipeline" is jarring to say the least.

natalyarostova 6y ago
:)

MattGaiser 6y ago

It is not a few things, but rather one of the core reasons governments cannot do technology well.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

zjaffee 6y ago

Except in the world of education there's been a substantial amount of people without their own direct experience in the field who've put out claims that they can materially change things when they have been completely unable to do so time and time again. I do see value for an institution described as such in this post, but much more on the research side of things with a secondary focus on should a new branch of the military be established to focus specifically on cyber issues, such an institution could become valuable in the same vain as something like west point.

TheCoelacanth 6y ago

You could flip it around and say that the commenter is the exact type of person that Schmidt needs to sell on this idea for it to be a success (people who would study tech and then go work for the government) and they aren't buying it. Schmidt failed to consider the perspective of one of the key stakeholders in the area he's trying to change. His idea would get laughed out of the room if he wasn't already a billionaire.

mav3rick 6y ago
Most ideas in history were laughed at.

mbesto 6y ago

Classic modern HN comment response. You act like these criticisms are somehow inherently negative... Just because people love to point out the HN discussion where Drew Houston got scrutiny for Dropbox, doesn't mean that discussion isn't valuable. I'm sure as hell Drew learned a ton from the criticisms. This is the point of HN - it's OK.

natalyarostova 6y ago
Maybe you're right. I felt the over-confident claim that it would fail to make it cross the line. If we discourage people from trying 1/100 or even 1/1000 chances because it's overwhelmingly likely they fail, we miss out on the massive upside offered by these risks.