6 ms·

"the selflessly-helping side of the Valley" Never having lived in the valley, I've struggled to understand what it means. Can anyone share some examples?

Avicebron 4mo ago
Not technically the valley but I crashed on couches in sleepy hollow and san rafael before I started making money out in the Bay.
mikeyouse 4mo ago
There is a really tremendous streak of people helping people with no strings attached that I hadn’t found anywhere else I’ve lived. Especially but not exclusively on the engineering / product side - for a long time you could take a greyhound to Soma and have a couch to crash on and a job interview lined up without knowing anyone. Introductions are made without a second thought (extremely contrary to my east coast experience where to get an intro, it must be “worth” something to the third party), it is (was? I moved away a few years ago) an extremely special and collaborative place.
- brtkwr 4mo ago
  Does that not extend beyond tech founders? I hear that SF has one of the highest rates of homelessness...
  - xp84 4mo ago
    Not even the richest person can simply cure thousands of people of addiction and set them on the right path in life. If you want to prove me wrong, surely even with non-millionaire resources, you could afford to just take in one into your home, feed them, and fix their problems. I’ll be genuinely glad to be proven wrong.
    - goosejuice 4mo ago
      You don't need to cure everyone to improve the homelessness situation.
      - tough 4mo ago
        There's plenty of great examples of governments deciding to deal with drug abuse in a more humane way, resulting in much better outcomes, see Portugal or Switzerland etc
  - Dumblydorr 4mo ago
    It’s a fair point about the valley’s tremendous wealth and problems, but what would Om say? It’s a little off the topic of remembering his life and work?
  - znpy 4mo ago
    > I hear that SF has one of the highest rates of homelessness... My understanding is that homelessness in California is a business similar to dating apps (tinder etc). If dating apps would actually find you a partner, they would all go out of business. So dating apps mainly keep you on the hook, fishing for subscriptions.
    - gumby271 4mo ago
      Who's benefiting from SF homelessness?
      - tough 4mo ago
        most probably all the bullshit government "agencies" run by people mostly interested on getting a salary. If you erradicate homelessness all these jobs woudlnt exist. Do you think your tax money really goes to get people out of the streets?
        stonogo 4mo ago
        Sorry, are you accusing government workers of deliberately de-housing people in pursuit of a bad salary?
        ymolodtsov 4mo ago
        It's not the government workers, it's non-profits getting grants from the government.
    - kmeisthax 4mo ago
      You may be right, but your angle of causation is wrong. California is not creating homelessness to milk money out of rich MSNBC shitlibs. They created homelessness as a side effect of them making housing very expensive... in order to placate those same rich MSNBC shitlibs who you think are being defrauded. California's ruling class is a landed gentry of boomers that all bought into the housing market before Prop 13 froze their tax rates in place. They will weaponize anything to stop any construction which they think might lower their property values. Hell, Beverly Hills used their school district in order to launch a frivolous lawsuit against the LA Metro D line expansion, because Beverly Hills is full of rich idiots who think public transit ruins property values[0]. So California can't get rid of homelessness - not because it means the homeless shelters[1] will be out of a job, but because homeless people are the natural consequence of making housing unaffordably expensive. The only actual solution to homelessness is the one thing California will never do on pain of death. The homeless shelters are there to create moral cover for NIMBYs making the city too expensive to live in. So the homeless shelters aren't ripping off the shitlibs; the shitlibs are paying them to sweep the problem under the rug, and they are dutifully doing so. [0] Cars ruin property values, because cars require lots of very expensive infrastructure like highways and stroads, and nobody wants to live or shop next to a giant pollution generator. In contrast, access to public transit increases land value! But the California gentry all drive so they don't care about this. [1] Please interpret "homeless shelters" to mean "any government agency involved with homelessness management". Technically speaking SF has a lot of unsheltered homeless because, well, living unsheltered is just not as hellishly awful as it is in other cities.
- sokoloff 4mo ago
  As a life-long east coaster, I am reluctant/unwilling to make an introduction of someone I don’t know at all. It’s not that I have to get something of worth to make an intro, but I think my intro carries an implied vouch (at least a tiny one) and I can’t do that if I don’t know you. If I know you and can actually vouch for you, I’ll happily make any intro where I stand to gain nothing. I somewhat frequently get a cold outreach asking me to recommend someone I’ve never met to something/someone I know and I can’t understand how that ever works.
  - hnmullany 4mo ago
    I think the strength of the "vouch" is understood to be much weaker in Silicon Valley - it's more like - I've talked to this guy for 30mins to an hour and I can vouch that he (or she) is not a waste of time for you to talk to them for a similar amount of time. It's not a vouch that they're the next Steve Jobs or you have diligenced their background.
  - ghaff 4mo ago
    I think you and I (also east coast) seem to have similar philosophies. I'm more retired than not these days. I'll certainly respond to a query by email or talk at a conference about my various former professions/experiences (which more often than not never get responded to). But I'm not going to refer someone just because we went to the same school but I've never met or because we had coffee for 30 minutes (unless they really impressed me in some way).
    - cobbzilla 4mo ago
      maybe that’s the point. in the SV mentality I wouldn’t refer someone solely based on their credentials or a superficial connection either. It would be because I had an engaging conversation that made me think of you, and then thinking that you would also find value in having conversation with that person. Because I know you’re curious and want the latest new ideas, it’s perceived as a gift in SV-land. I wouldn’t offer an experience that wasn’t win-win. EDIT: thinking further about this, it’s really a difference in sampling techniques to ascertain reality and strategy. In SV, you want to gather as many wild and crazy ideas as possible. You’re not upset if you have the occasional low-value conversation, because you have so many conversations with so many people that you can synthesize a hi-res picture of what you’re looking at. I feel maybe the East Coast mentality is the inverse: I want to sample from few sources, whose quality is guaranteed to be very high.
650REDHAIR 4mo ago
There’s a large group of people who want to help and see you succeed- even if it won’t benefit them directly. I stepped away nearly a decade ago so I don’t know how true that is for the tech “scene” today, but it was really great and inspiring for a very young transplant like me.
goodpoint 4mo ago
"valley" and "selfless" in the same sentence is surprising...
- cobbzilla 4mo ago
  sad but that’s why I left. To use a tired DnD analogy, SV used to be kind of a chaotic/neutral place, I liked that. We all helped each other. Now it’s lawful/good but good implies moral choices, many of which I agree with but for some disagreement means shunning. So I left.
  - justusthane 4mo ago
    Really? I’d think more like chaotic good -> lawful neutral (at best).
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
cobbzilla 4mo ago
When I was first trying to start companies, I would ask everyone for advice. Some people are more engaging and helpful than others. Some people expect something in return. In SV, in the 90s/00s, no one wanted anything in return. Everyone was there to help. We all understood that the entrepreneur’s path is a nearly impossible one, and if you have somehow followed it to success, you want to try to guide others to that successful place. After ~20 years I’ve left SV but I retain the mentality :) AMA
riemannzeta 4mo ago
https://steveblank.com/2011/09/15/the-pay-it-forward-culture/ https://steveblank.com/2011/09/15/the-pay-it-forward-culture...
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
ymolodtsov 4mo ago
In many other regions of the world if you ask someone to connect you with a potential investor they demand a success fee. In SV, they do not. Because they're playing a very long iterated game and understand, that even if they don't make a bank themselves, knowing future-successful people will be a great benefit.

Avicebron 4mo ago

Not technically the valley but I crashed on couches in sleepy hollow and san rafael before I started making money out in the Bay.

mikeyouse 4mo ago

There is a really tremendous streak of people helping people with no strings attached that I hadn’t found anywhere else I’ve lived. Especially but not exclusively on the engineering / product side - for a long time you could take a greyhound to Soma and have a couch to crash on and a job interview lined up without knowing anyone. Introductions are made without a second thought (extremely contrary to my east coast experience where to get an intro, it must be “worth” something to the third party), it is (was? I moved away a few years ago) an extremely special and collaborative place.

brtkwr 4mo ago
Does that not extend beyond tech founders? I hear that SF has one of the highest rates of homelessness...
- xp84 4mo ago
  Not even the richest person can simply cure thousands of people of addiction and set them on the right path in life. If you want to prove me wrong, surely even with non-millionaire resources, you could afford to just take in one into your home, feed them, and fix their problems. I’ll be genuinely glad to be proven wrong.
  - goosejuice 4mo ago
    You don't need to cure everyone to improve the homelessness situation.
    - tough 4mo ago
      There's plenty of great examples of governments deciding to deal with drug abuse in a more humane way, resulting in much better outcomes, see Portugal or Switzerland etc
- Dumblydorr 4mo ago
  It’s a fair point about the valley’s tremendous wealth and problems, but what would Om say? It’s a little off the topic of remembering his life and work?
- znpy 4mo ago
  > I hear that SF has one of the highest rates of homelessness... My understanding is that homelessness in California is a business similar to dating apps (tinder etc). If dating apps would actually find you a partner, they would all go out of business. So dating apps mainly keep you on the hook, fishing for subscriptions.
  - gumby271 4mo ago
    Who's benefiting from SF homelessness?
    - tough 4mo ago
      most probably all the bullshit government "agencies" run by people mostly interested on getting a salary. If you erradicate homelessness all these jobs woudlnt exist. Do you think your tax money really goes to get people out of the streets?
      - stonogo 4mo ago
        Sorry, are you accusing government workers of deliberately de-housing people in pursuit of a bad salary?
        ymolodtsov 4mo ago
        It's not the government workers, it's non-profits getting grants from the government.
  - kmeisthax 4mo ago
    You may be right, but your angle of causation is wrong. California is not creating homelessness to milk money out of rich MSNBC shitlibs. They created homelessness as a side effect of them making housing very expensive... in order to placate those same rich MSNBC shitlibs who you think are being defrauded. California's ruling class is a landed gentry of boomers that all bought into the housing market before Prop 13 froze their tax rates in place. They will weaponize anything to stop any construction which they think might lower their property values. Hell, Beverly Hills used their school district in order to launch a frivolous lawsuit against the LA Metro D line expansion, because Beverly Hills is full of rich idiots who think public transit ruins property values[0]. So California can't get rid of homelessness - not because it means the homeless shelters[1] will be out of a job, but because homeless people are the natural consequence of making housing unaffordably expensive. The only actual solution to homelessness is the one thing California will never do on pain of death. The homeless shelters are there to create moral cover for NIMBYs making the city too expensive to live in. So the homeless shelters aren't ripping off the shitlibs; the shitlibs are paying them to sweep the problem under the rug, and they are dutifully doing so. [0] Cars ruin property values, because cars require lots of very expensive infrastructure like highways and stroads, and nobody wants to live or shop next to a giant pollution generator. In contrast, access to public transit increases land value! But the California gentry all drive so they don't care about this. [1] Please interpret "homeless shelters" to mean "any government agency involved with homelessness management". Technically speaking SF has a lot of unsheltered homeless because, well, living unsheltered is just not as hellishly awful as it is in other cities.
sokoloff 4mo ago
As a life-long east coaster, I am reluctant/unwilling to make an introduction of someone I don’t know at all. It’s not that I have to get something of worth to make an intro, but I think my intro carries an implied vouch (at least a tiny one) and I can’t do that if I don’t know you. If I know you and can actually vouch for you, I’ll happily make any intro where I stand to gain nothing. I somewhat frequently get a cold outreach asking me to recommend someone I’ve never met to something/someone I know and I can’t understand how that ever works.
- hnmullany 4mo ago
  I think the strength of the "vouch" is understood to be much weaker in Silicon Valley - it's more like - I've talked to this guy for 30mins to an hour and I can vouch that he (or she) is not a waste of time for you to talk to them for a similar amount of time. It's not a vouch that they're the next Steve Jobs or you have diligenced their background.
- ghaff 4mo ago
  I think you and I (also east coast) seem to have similar philosophies. I'm more retired than not these days. I'll certainly respond to a query by email or talk at a conference about my various former professions/experiences (which more often than not never get responded to). But I'm not going to refer someone just because we went to the same school but I've never met or because we had coffee for 30 minutes (unless they really impressed me in some way).
  - cobbzilla 4mo ago
    maybe that’s the point. in the SV mentality I wouldn’t refer someone solely based on their credentials or a superficial connection either. It would be because I had an engaging conversation that made me think of you, and then thinking that you would also find value in having conversation with that person. Because I know you’re curious and want the latest new ideas, it’s perceived as a gift in SV-land. I wouldn’t offer an experience that wasn’t win-win. EDIT: thinking further about this, it’s really a difference in sampling techniques to ascertain reality and strategy. In SV, you want to gather as many wild and crazy ideas as possible. You’re not upset if you have the occasional low-value conversation, because you have so many conversations with so many people that you can synthesize a hi-res picture of what you’re looking at. I feel maybe the East Coast mentality is the inverse: I want to sample from few sources, whose quality is guaranteed to be very high.

650REDHAIR 4mo ago

There’s a large group of people who want to help and see you succeed- even if it won’t benefit them directly. I stepped away nearly a decade ago so I don’t know how true that is for the tech “scene” today, but it was really great and inspiring for a very young transplant like me.

goodpoint 4mo ago

"valley" and "selfless" in the same sentence is surprising...

cobbzilla 4mo ago
sad but that’s why I left. To use a tired DnD analogy, SV used to be kind of a chaotic/neutral place, I liked that. We all helped each other. Now it’s lawful/good but good implies moral choices, many of which I agree with but for some disagreement means shunning. So I left.
- justusthane 4mo ago
  Really? I’d think more like chaotic good -> lawful neutral (at best).
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]

cobbzilla 4mo ago

When I was first trying to start companies, I would ask everyone for advice. Some people are more engaging and helpful than others. Some people expect something in return. In SV, in the 90s/00s, no one wanted anything in return. Everyone was there to help. We all understood that the entrepreneur’s path is a nearly impossible one, and if you have somehow followed it to success, you want to try to guide others to that successful place. After ~20 years I’ve left SV but I retain the mentality :) AMA

riemannzeta 4mo ago

https://steveblank.com/2011/09/15/the-pay-it-forward-culture/ https://steveblank.com/2011/09/15/the-pay-it-forward-culture...

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

ymolodtsov 4mo ago

In many other regions of the world if you ask someone to connect you with a potential investor they demand a success fee. In SV, they do not. Because they're playing a very long iterated game and understand, that even if they don't make a bank themselves, knowing future-successful people will be a great benefit.