3 ms·

Even if it were possible, I still don't think it a good idea. That money has to come from somewhere, and it comes from the bank accounts of people that planned

Even if it were possible, I still don't think it a good idea. That money has to come from somewhere, and it comes from the bank accounts of people that planned to use it on something other than investing in startups. There's nothing that startups add to a community that I think is a priori better than other things that a community of people would have chosen voluntarily to spend its money on. Some places fund startups, some don't. That's what comes from having free will and individual liberty. Other people may make different choices than we would, but it doesn't follow that we should force them to be like us. I suggest we should respect other peoples' autonomy. It has long been the credo of the social planner that the common man is too stupid and too provincial to pursue his own happiness, and that he should be cajoled into doing what is good for him. That credo has been the prelude to a lot of well-intentioned misery. I understand that there are things which are "public goods" which we may wisely choose to produce with public dollars, but investing in private businesses doesn't strike me as one of those public goods. I don't see the social value in taking a lot of money from private folks to spread a concentration of startups more evenly over the landscape. I understand that Paul is pondering what can be done and not what ought to be done. I just don't think it is a good idea. If I want to live in an area with lots of startups, I'll move to Silicon Valley where people have voluntarily chosen to fund them. Finally, Paul states that this is a good idea because municipalities already waste a lot of money on projects of dubious value, such as baseball stadiums. That's true, but it doesn't follow that those municipalities should spend that money on other projects of dubious value. Another response would be that they should leave people and their money alone.

michaelkeenan 18y ago
Though PG specifically mentioned politics, I took away the message that any person or group with $30 million could do it, if they wanted. Is it likely that someone cares enough about a specific place to to altruistically transform it into Silicon Valley? Probably not (maybe in a seasteading future?), but nor is this politically feasible. So, it's just fun to think about.
- pg 18y ago
  That is a very interesting idea. I didn't think of that. You could do the 30-startup experiment with private money. And what pressure it would put on the city if it succeeded. Thanks for this idea. I just added a paragraph to the essay mentioning it.
  - alabut 18y ago
    Is this the first time you've edited an already-published essay because of feedback on HN?
    - pg 18y ago
      No, I've done that a couple times before.
      - alabut 18y ago
        That's a great use of crowdsourcing for your editing. I wonder how that could work in a more automated and scalable way. I'm thinking something similar to Etherpad, but with feedback rather than actual edits, like if people could leave comments and suggestions inline, with some kind of HN-style upvoting and troll-flagging. Then the originating author could cherrypick the best suggestions into being actual edits. Something like Wikipedia but more reader-friendly, without infinite levels of backwards revisions. Or that could be stupid in practice, maybe a handful of close associates with honest feedback is way better than taking all comers.
        megamark16 18y ago
        I've actually considered this as a startup idea, except they would be actual news articles about local events or occurrences. Instead of interviewing witnesses to a local house fire or bank holdup the witnesses would just log on and add their witness accounts to articles, and people could attach pictures and videos as well (hey, everyone has a camera phone these days). Of course everything (articles, witness accounts, pictures and videos, etc) would all be user moderated and up or down modded, so if someone posts an account that seems less then verifiable then it could get downmodded. The user base would also act as editor, so people can suggest spelling/grammatical changes and other users can up or down mod specific changes. It would require an enormously involved user base but imagine getting news reports directly from the people seeing it happen. Later Mark

michaelkeenan 18y ago

Though PG specifically mentioned politics, I took away the message that any person or group with $30 million could do it, if they wanted. Is it likely that someone cares enough about a specific place to to altruistically transform it into Silicon Valley? Probably not (maybe in a seasteading future?), but nor is this politically feasible. So, it's just fun to think about.

pg 18y ago
That is a very interesting idea. I didn't think of that. You could do the 30-startup experiment with private money. And what pressure it would put on the city if it succeeded. Thanks for this idea. I just added a paragraph to the essay mentioning it.
- alabut 18y ago
  Is this the first time you've edited an already-published essay because of feedback on HN?
  - pg 18y ago
    No, I've done that a couple times before.
    - alabut 18y ago
      That's a great use of crowdsourcing for your editing. I wonder how that could work in a more automated and scalable way. I'm thinking something similar to Etherpad, but with feedback rather than actual edits, like if people could leave comments and suggestions inline, with some kind of HN-style upvoting and troll-flagging. Then the originating author could cherrypick the best suggestions into being actual edits. Something like Wikipedia but more reader-friendly, without infinite levels of backwards revisions. Or that could be stupid in practice, maybe a handful of close associates with honest feedback is way better than taking all comers.
      - megamark16 18y ago
        I've actually considered this as a startup idea, except they would be actual news articles about local events or occurrences. Instead of interviewing witnesses to a local house fire or bank holdup the witnesses would just log on and add their witness accounts to articles, and people could attach pictures and videos as well (hey, everyone has a camera phone these days). Of course everything (articles, witness accounts, pictures and videos, etc) would all be user moderated and up or down modded, so if someone posts an account that seems less then verifiable then it could get downmodded. The user base would also act as editor, so people can suggest spelling/grammatical changes and other users can up or down mod specific changes. It would require an enormously involved user base but imagine getting news reports directly from the people seeing it happen. Later Mark