Live data from Hacker News

Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

entrepreneur.com

11–20 of 135 posts

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#11

Silicon Valley is great at tech because it has a high concentration of tech companies and top universities. It doesn't have that for agriculture. The "Silicon Valley" of agriculture is in Wageningen, a small university town in The Netherlands. In the surrounding area you have a huge number of food/agri-tech firms.

i’m not sure if silicon valley is great at technical prowess anymore. the hype machine has run its course and the tech is more proliferated and distributed than ever before.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#13
post #3

> 4. You can't A/B test a farm (yet) This is done all the time. When evaluating a new seed variety, a different seed spacing, a new nitrogen application, farmers will do a test plot next to the control. If things looks good then they'll expand the new change to more acreage.

That is a pretty wild statement. I would assume A/B testing in farming has happened for centuries. Farms are made up of a multitude of fields. And so are a perfect environment for A/B testing. I did A in one field but stuck with method B in the other and saw that the former crops had higher yield, etc. etc.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#15
post #5

The key insight Silicon Valley lacks about agriculture is that there is little potential for a big win. Major improvements mean 10% of something, not 10x. US agriculture is already highly efficient. On the down side, there's potential for a big loss if you screw up.

Vertical farming can do 10X, GMOs can do 10x, urban farming can cut out 90% of transportation costs, (not exactly what you mean but getting people to eat less meat would 100x our efficiencies) there is still room for improvement.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#16
post #5

The key insight Silicon Valley lacks about agriculture is that there is little potential for a big win. Major improvements mean 10% of something, not 10x. US agriculture is already highly efficient. On the down side, there's potential for a big loss if you screw up.

I think there is an argument that agriculture is highly inefficient because we can't track externalities well. US topsoil in our bread basket was 14 inches a hundred years ago. It is down to 4 inches now. When it goes, we go.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#17
post #5

The key insight Silicon Valley lacks about agriculture is that there is little potential for a big win. Major improvements mean 10% of something, not 10x. US agriculture is already highly efficient. On the down side, there's potential for a big loss if you screw up.

This is not a good take. The company that enables an improvement of 10% can still make tens of billions of dollars. I assure you that adtech knows all about the value of optimizing at the margin.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#18
post #3

> 4. You can't A/B test a farm (yet) This is done all the time. When evaluating a new seed variety, a different seed spacing, a new nitrogen application, farmers will do a test plot next to the control. If things looks good then they'll expand the new change to more acreage.

This is really funny to me after living near a place that has done exactly that for ~100 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Experimental_Farm

Or the Incas, experimenting with micro climates 500 years ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moray_(Inca_ruin)

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#19
post #5

The key insight Silicon Valley lacks about agriculture is that there is little potential for a big win. Major improvements mean 10% of something, not 10x. US agriculture is already highly efficient. On the down side, there's potential for a big loss if you screw up.

Vertical farming can do 10X, GMOs can do 10x, urban farming can cut out 90% of transportation costs, (not exactly what you mean but getting people to eat less meat would 100x our efficiencies) there is still room for improvement.

Even in a place like Canada where so much food is imported, transportation only adds up to about 12pc of the total energy cost.

I'm not aware of any vertical farm that is 10x as efficient as a regular farm.

Re: Things Silicon Valley gets wrong about agriculture

#20
post #3

> 4. You can't A/B test a farm (yet) This is done all the time. When evaluating a new seed variety, a different seed spacing, a new nitrogen application, farmers will do a test plot next to the control. If things looks good then they'll expand the new change to more acreage.

There's farms near me that have a field of corn, every 5 rows has a different sign up with some sort of code and a logo for a seed company. I'd always assumed thats what they were testing.
Post reply on HN