14 ms·

SecureIT sold ISS's stuff - but you're right - there is no genetic link. Jay did acknowledge that ISS made the market hot and showed the potential. Anyway, th

by rjurney 17y ago

SecureIT sold ISS's stuff - but you're right - there is no genetic link. Jay did acknowledge that ISS made the market hot and showed the potential. Anyway, that is perhaps the most interesting part of the graph. Multiple root nodes sprung up as the market exploded - and the cluster sustained in Atlanta, whereas other dot com clusters did not. I don't think thats coincidental - I think security is a good fit for Atlanta, and so it prospered. I haven't said so - but I take it for granted that Georgia Tech is behind all of this. It is widely acknowledged that a solid research university is a prerequisite for these clusters to form. A founder map is just one way to look at this data. If you look at all employment overlap, funding, etc. the web gets very dense, and you see many more connections between these companies. The executive overlap in particular is very strong. When I started this, Linkedin's API was not open, and so I did this one manually because it is at a scale I could manually aggregate. Now that its open, other kinds of maps are possible. This is just an introduction, I'm going to be digging in deeper in later articles.

tptacek 17y ago
I really hate to admit it, but Hotlanta has a real startup scene. Maybe part of what's happening is: * Many of the other major CS/EE research universities are in cow towns like Ann Arbor, Chambana, and Madison. * Many of the other non-Valley tech centers happen to be in places, like Atlanta, Seattle, and Austin, where a research university coincides with a thriving metro area. * The few places that don't have startup scenes proportional to their population size and University caliber are, like NYC and LA, prohibitively expensive. I like the work you're doing. I'm just pointing out that there's a huge biasing effect with ISS. It's the first successful IT security startup (the Netscape of its field), which sets you up for post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc. Even its GATech roots are easy to overstate (much of its original talent came from Arizona and California).
- rjurney 17y ago
  Yes, Atlanta has a real startup scene across several clusters. It doesn't have one across all clusters - and many people are in denial about this, and what it means to them personally. ISS is just a starting point. As a writer, its easier to approach a complicated topic with a hook - ISS is the hook. But I don't think its coincidence that ISS was the netscape of its field, and the fact that we have a sustaining cluster in security. I agree that bringing in talent from afar happened - that seems to have been key to many of the offspring.
  - tptacek 17y ago
    Ok. So, if it's not a coincidence that ISS was the Netscape of security in Atlanta, what do you think the reason is? (If you can't tell, I'm somewhat closer to the history of ISS than most HN readers, and not just because I'm in security).
    - rjurney 17y ago
      I think Atlanta was very lucky to have Chris Klaus and ISS, but it also happened to have Jay Chaudhry and Michael McChesney. It happened to have Tom Noonan, Sig Mosely and John Imlay, who were visionary enough to see the potential of Chris's product. It happened to have MSA. It happened to have an existing workforce in network communications and finance with transferrable skills, and it happened to have Georgia Tech. I think that all adds up to a good fit. I think Atlanta wanted to birth a security cluster. I think there were vectors in place, pushing Atlanta the whole way.
      - tptacek 17y ago
        Tom Noonan is a very good point. There were Chris Klauses in at least 3 other places at the same time, but only one ISS and only one Tom Noonan. ISS was also managed very differently than their mid-'90s competitors, in ways you can trace back to Noonan. Noonan is also definitely a product of Atlanta.
        rjurney 17y ago
        Tom also invested in and advised many companies after ISS. The founders of SPI dynamics are doing the same thing. Lots of the founders of these companies that exited have done that, or gone on to found more than one company. Its what sustains the cluster.

by rjurney 17y ago

tptacek 17y ago

I really hate to admit it, but Hotlanta has a real startup scene. Maybe part of what's happening is: * Many of the other major CS/EE research universities are in cow towns like Ann Arbor, Chambana, and Madison. * Many of the other non-Valley tech centers happen to be in places, like Atlanta, Seattle, and Austin, where a research university coincides with a thriving metro area. * The few places that don't have startup scenes proportional to their population size and University caliber are, like NYC and LA, prohibitively expensive. I like the work you're doing. I'm just pointing out that there's a huge biasing effect with ISS. It's the first successful IT security startup (the Netscape of its field), which sets you up for post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc. Even its GATech roots are easy to overstate (much of its original talent came from Arizona and California).

rjurney 17y ago
Yes, Atlanta has a real startup scene across several clusters. It doesn't have one across all clusters - and many people are in denial about this, and what it means to them personally. ISS is just a starting point. As a writer, its easier to approach a complicated topic with a hook - ISS is the hook. But I don't think its coincidence that ISS was the netscape of its field, and the fact that we have a sustaining cluster in security. I agree that bringing in talent from afar happened - that seems to have been key to many of the offspring.
- tptacek 17y ago
  Ok. So, if it's not a coincidence that ISS was the Netscape of security in Atlanta, what do you think the reason is? (If you can't tell, I'm somewhat closer to the history of ISS than most HN readers, and not just because I'm in security).
  - rjurney 17y ago
    I think Atlanta was very lucky to have Chris Klaus and ISS, but it also happened to have Jay Chaudhry and Michael McChesney. It happened to have Tom Noonan, Sig Mosely and John Imlay, who were visionary enough to see the potential of Chris's product. It happened to have MSA. It happened to have an existing workforce in network communications and finance with transferrable skills, and it happened to have Georgia Tech. I think that all adds up to a good fit. I think Atlanta wanted to birth a security cluster. I think there were vectors in place, pushing Atlanta the whole way.
    - tptacek 17y ago
      Tom Noonan is a very good point. There were Chris Klauses in at least 3 other places at the same time, but only one ISS and only one Tom Noonan. ISS was also managed very differently than their mid-'90s competitors, in ways you can trace back to Noonan. Noonan is also definitely a product of Atlanta.
      - rjurney 17y ago
        Tom also invested in and advised many companies after ISS. The founders of SPI dynamics are doing the same thing. Lots of the founders of these companies that exited have done that, or gone on to found more than one company. Its what sustains the cluster.