3 ms·

There is a famous saying in Japanese "七転び八起き" which means even if you fall 7 times, get up 8 times and move forward. But at the same time, the Japanese wants to

There is a famous saying in Japanese "七転び八起き" which means even if you fall 7 times, get up 8 times and move forward. But at the same time, the Japanese wants to do things well and organized, the citizens does not like failure, it's a country that fears shame. Are we really that different? In the US, we seem to have this sense of superiority on this issue, but I think our tolerance of risk is paper-thin. It's superficial. To get deeper into it, I find VC-istan to be especially hypocritical, because while it takes what seems to be a progressive attitude toward business failure, it's also a world in which, if you're not a C*O by 35 and an investor (read: rich and semi-retired) of some sort by 42, you're written off entirely as a useless human being. How, exactly, is this supposed to encourage resilience? If anything, that's the exact mentality that created the stodgy risk-aversion of these blue-chip corporations VC-istan considers itself ready to replace. VC-istan is a postmodern corporation in which "tech companies" are disposable, because they're mere sub-projects of the meta-company. "Founders" are nominally independent project managers and investors are the real executives. What seems like a tolerant attitude toward business failure is actually the (probably beneficial, but cutthroat) willingness of this meta-company's executives (investors) to cancel projects for a variety of reasons. Getting people to "wake up" isn't about changing one culture. The problem is that human nature is to pick leaders based on apparent success, and to ostracize failures. That works well in groups of 20 individuals that are barely surviving-- that is, our evolutionary frame-- but is not what you need in order to design or encourage a rational technological economy.

Surio 14y ago
>>In the US, we seem to have this sense of superiority on this issue, but I think our tolerance of risk is paper-thin. It's superficial. Hmmm... Judging by the overall comments so far, it seems every culture seems to has an acute (and accurate) sense of its own thin-skinnedness that another cultures' perception of them. Most of the points you make is validated by another article making rounds in the first page here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5270460 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5270460 From the article linked to that thread: When I was raising my first round, it fell apart because an A-list investor who had given us a verbal commitment backed out. He did this because he had heard from his friend, who I had went out for beers with, said that we were struggling and unsure of what we were doing. >> The problem is that human nature is to pick leaders based on apparent success, and to ostracise failures. Given that you've framed it like so, that nails it then? Status quo as it is now, is not going to change anytime soon! Let's stop wasting our time and get on with the rest of our lives, doing whatever it is that we are currently doing, eh? :-| [wry smiley] P.S: Not being sarcastic, or picking on you in my reply. Hope that comes out clear :-/
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  These problems are easy to diagnose and hard to solve. The problem with VC-istan is collusion. As a group, they decide who's hot, who's credible, and who's a loser. Rather than competing with each other, VCs communicate in all sorts of inappropriate ways and make these decisions as a herd. This means there isn't a fair market. The powerful people on one side have found it more advantageous to be in each others' good graces than to compete with each other, which would favor people they don't care about. One thing I've learned having studied history is that the best thing for smart people is to create a cleavage within the elite. The Protestant Reformation was a time of high social mobility for intelligent people as the elites of Europe lost cohesion due to the Catholic/Protestant division. Henry VIII was detested by other nobles in large part because he promoted intelligent commoners (social mobility) to high offices who could assist him in his break from the Church. Then, there's the Cold War. Just think of how much scientific progress exists because of this hairline fracture in the world's ruling class. Powerful people want to glom together and form a clique at the top. The best thing that can happen for smart people is for one half of the powerful people to have a mortal hatred for the other half, so this can't happen. As the elites destroy each other, they'll hire smart people from without and that generates social mobility and a resource transfer away from the entrenched elite and toward talented people. If you want to save VC-istan, here's how to do it. Randomly assign all of the top 500 players to Red and Blue Teams. Team identity follows a person, not a firm. It's inflexible. Whichever team makes more money in the next 15 years owns all the personal financial assets (houses, bank accounts) of the other team. Even if Blue only wins slightly, it means the Reds lose all their financial assets. I don't make this as a serious suggestion, but that will get some genuine technology made.
  - stanfordkid 14y ago
    What you say is hardly the case. Top 8 VC firms compete with each other incredibly hard for the best deals. The top-8 as a group make up 80% of all venture capital returns so maybe that should tell you something about their decision making criteria. The best VC firms do pick and choose what to invest in, and this is based only on what they think will make them the most money. Perhaps that isn't equivalent to "technological progress" but one can hardly call it collusion.
SatvikBeri 14y ago
You're correct that US culture is more risk averse than it claims to be, but it's worth noting that Japan is MUCH worse than the US when it comes to risk aversion. Bankruptcy affects your entire family and is almost irrecoverable. "Entrepreneur" is a dirty word. Overwork is insane: 10-12 hour work days are frequently the norm, and getting fired once or expelled in high school can essentially ruin your career. It's way better in the US. Personally, I dropped out of high school and have had 4 jobs in the last 4 years-one of which I was fired from (not laid off.) But I'm fairly good at what I do, and in the US my experience allows me to have a pretty awesome job, while in Japan I'd be basically unemployable.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

Surio 14y ago

>>In the US, we seem to have this sense of superiority on this issue, but I think our tolerance of risk is paper-thin. It's superficial. Hmmm... Judging by the overall comments so far, it seems every culture seems to has an acute (and accurate) sense of its own thin-skinnedness that another cultures' perception of them. Most of the points you make is validated by another article making rounds in the first page here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5270460 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5270460 From the article linked to that thread: When I was raising my first round, it fell apart because an A-list investor who had given us a verbal commitment backed out. He did this because he had heard from his friend, who I had went out for beers with, said that we were struggling and unsure of what we were doing. >> The problem is that human nature is to pick leaders based on apparent success, and to ostracise failures. Given that you've framed it like so, that nails it then? Status quo as it is now, is not going to change anytime soon! Let's stop wasting our time and get on with the rest of our lives, doing whatever it is that we are currently doing, eh? :-| [wry smiley] P.S: Not being sarcastic, or picking on you in my reply. Hope that comes out clear :-/

michaelochurch 14y ago
These problems are easy to diagnose and hard to solve. The problem with VC-istan is collusion. As a group, they decide who's hot, who's credible, and who's a loser. Rather than competing with each other, VCs communicate in all sorts of inappropriate ways and make these decisions as a herd. This means there isn't a fair market. The powerful people on one side have found it more advantageous to be in each others' good graces than to compete with each other, which would favor people they don't care about. One thing I've learned having studied history is that the best thing for smart people is to create a cleavage within the elite. The Protestant Reformation was a time of high social mobility for intelligent people as the elites of Europe lost cohesion due to the Catholic/Protestant division. Henry VIII was detested by other nobles in large part because he promoted intelligent commoners (social mobility) to high offices who could assist him in his break from the Church. Then, there's the Cold War. Just think of how much scientific progress exists because of this hairline fracture in the world's ruling class. Powerful people want to glom together and form a clique at the top. The best thing that can happen for smart people is for one half of the powerful people to have a mortal hatred for the other half, so this can't happen. As the elites destroy each other, they'll hire smart people from without and that generates social mobility and a resource transfer away from the entrenched elite and toward talented people. If you want to save VC-istan, here's how to do it. Randomly assign all of the top 500 players to Red and Blue Teams. Team identity follows a person, not a firm. It's inflexible. Whichever team makes more money in the next 15 years owns all the personal financial assets (houses, bank accounts) of the other team. Even if Blue only wins slightly, it means the Reds lose all their financial assets. I don't make this as a serious suggestion, but that will get some genuine technology made.
- stanfordkid 14y ago
  What you say is hardly the case. Top 8 VC firms compete with each other incredibly hard for the best deals. The top-8 as a group make up 80% of all venture capital returns so maybe that should tell you something about their decision making criteria. The best VC firms do pick and choose what to invest in, and this is based only on what they think will make them the most money. Perhaps that isn't equivalent to "technological progress" but one can hardly call it collusion.

SatvikBeri 14y ago

You're correct that US culture is more risk averse than it claims to be, but it's worth noting that Japan is MUCH worse than the US when it comes to risk aversion. Bankruptcy affects your entire family and is almost irrecoverable. "Entrepreneur" is a dirty word. Overwork is insane: 10-12 hour work days are frequently the norm, and getting fired once or expelled in high school can essentially ruin your career. It's way better in the US. Personally, I dropped out of high school and have had 4 jobs in the last 4 years-one of which I was fired from (not laid off.) But I'm fairly good at what I do, and in the US my experience allows me to have a pretty awesome job, while in Japan I'd be basically unemployable.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]