3 ms·
We've regulated the hell out of stuff and left bits relatively unregulated. Hence, more money going into bits. And more instant billionaires. Also no cure for
by seehafer 13y ago
We've regulated the hell out of stuff and left bits relatively unregulated.
Hence, more money going into bits. And more instant billionaires. Also no cure for cancer, or flying cars or (insert 1950's projection of the 21st century here).
edit: I'm borrowing Peter Thiel's "bits and stuff" metaphor here.
- tsax 13y agoIt's actually bits and atoms, but spot on.
- IgorPartola 13y agoI don't buy it. More regulation surely would change how software companies are valued, but I don't think lack of regulation is why they get valued so highly. Whether regulation here is good or bad I will not touch. My first inclination for why things like Facebook and SnapChat are valued so highly is because investors operate under the delusion that reaching many eyeballs means profit. What they seem to not grasp is that there is a fundamental difference between things like print and TV ads and ads on Facebook. When Facebook was bought, I did a rough calculation that given their valuation and number of users they'd need to extract $50-60 on average from each user to justify the valuation. That's a huge number. Most I know people to date have given them exactly zero: they don't play the games, click on ads, etc. Once the idea that having a huge number of inert users comes under test and we realize that it doesn't hold up, the valuations will plummet.
- gwern 13y ago> Hence, more money going into bits. And more instant billionaires. Also no cure for cancer, or flying cars or (insert 1950's projection of the 21st century here). Other countries like China have close to zero regulation compared to the USA in many areas. Why are there no Chinese cures for cancer or flying cars, if regulation is the overwhelming reason why?
- seehafer 13y agoActually Chinese medical regulation is in some ways worse than America! (I work in medical devices.) it's certainly more arbitrary. But the larger answer to that question is that China is still moving into the first world, a process that would be retarded if they were throwing massive amounts of capital into R&D
- nikcub 13y agoThe regulation in medicine (patents) incentivize investment. The reason for no cancer cure is not for lack of trying or investment.
- seehafer 13y agoI don't consider IP protection regulation. Medicine is subject to FDA regulation at the manufacturer level, JCHO at the hospital level, various state boards at the provider level, and both state and federal agencies at the payor (insurer) level. Actually I would argue that the reason for no cancer cure is that it's illegal to offer experimental drugs to people who 1) consent and 2) are going to die anyway. But that's another show.