Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 102 posts

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#71

Post by maxlamb »

jongjong wrote: post #49
maxlamb wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trust is shared values, not shared goals.

That's one interpretation but many people are incapable of separating the two so they have a different definition of trust. For example, if one has blackmail on someone else and both parties know it, the one who knows the dirt may feel that they 'trust' the other because of the fear that they instill in the other. E.g. I may say that I trust my bank with my money but, in fact, I have no shared values with them. I onl…

I’m sorry but if you think someone won’t harm you only because you have dirt on them, then neither of you really trust each other. Trust means you are confident that other person will not harm you regardless of what you have.

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#73

Post by s1artibartfast »

andsoitis wrote: post #70
s1artibartfast wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't know that "bailout" is quite an accurate description of what is happening. AFAIK it isn't as if the money was/is lost; it is more of a timing issue that is being bridged. Bridging that timing issue will cost a few billion dollars in real cash, and other banks are being fined to make up the difference.

I should've realized as I wrote that that there is a real cost (time == money). Do you know whether the other banks are being compelled? Or are they doing it willingly to shoulder their own kind?

They are being compelled.

>Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law.

I'm assuming it is all banks and the fine will be proportional to their size.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1337

This is basically how the 250k FDIC money is covered as well. All banks have to pay insurance fees to the FDIC, and when one goes belly up, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation pays out. The only difference is the 250k is prepaid

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#75

Post by tsunamifury »

BigCatStuff wrote: post #61
gkoberger wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most other banks didn't see the incredible growth SVB did, either.

I understand that they needed to put the money to work somewhere, but they really chose a bad way to do it. Hence the 'poorly controlled risk' that I mentioned.

I think it was quite fair to think they could have sold 10 year treasuries at cost at least. An invert yield curve for this long is not normal. But yes maybe they should have laddered better.

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#76

Post by smaccona »

gkoberger wrote: post #59

There's a Silicon Valley I see on the news and Twitter that I've still never once seen in real life. I moved to SF in 2008, and it was the most magical place on the planet. I met amazing people everywhere I went... smart, interesting people who just wanted to make cool things. I loved every second of it. And it's still that way to me. And I say this as a person who's been to my share of fancy VC parties. Sure, things…

I do not live or work in SV, but it's kind of interesting to me that this comment has no responses. Is that because what the parent states as being true is not actually the case, or is there some other reason why there are no responses to this comment? From my own experience with startups many moons ago (albeit on the East Coast, first Philadelphia and then New York) the parent comment rings true: it was my experience that startups totally helped each other out with (as examples) required documentation (e.g. regulatory stuff that's base-level, non-negotiable for specific spaces), tech-type things (e.g. you will probably encounter this question/problem, here's how we handled it) and other stuff too. Granted, this was in situations where the "helper" was not a direct competitor to the "helpee", but often they were at least in the same general market, otherwise the help being offered wouldn't even apply.

Edit: clarification

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#77

Post by ghusto »

jongjong wrote: post #19
cheerioty wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly enough, this makes a lot of sense to me and seems to be exactly what's happening.

How is the breakdown of trust a bad thing in this case? All that incestuous, unwarranted mutual trust and people helping each other only serves to shield the lazy and incompetent. What is that trust based on? It's based on nothing. For the most part, people in SV have no shared values aside from a desire to get rich at all costs (which is common, though maybe not universally shared). Such forms of trust should not ex…

This is so blindingly accurate that it had to be downvoted. How telling.

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#78

Post by birdymcbird »

Not at all. if my money in svb.. would have ran to pull it out.

too many armchair expert not understand issue effect people who not gamble money but victim of just having deposit.

main issue bankers did not hedge risk of inflation. why helping start ups survive losing all they cash is going to change my mind?

and this country waste tens of billions on bloated bureaucracy government. but a dime to people who will do innovation is bad? disagree

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#79

Post by ghusto »

kreutz wrote: post #9
gwbrooks wrote: post #8

Pre-SVB: Silicon Valley is full of self-interested organizations and people building things that, at times, result in wider societal benefit. Post-SVB: Same.

The world is full of self-interested organizations and people building things that, at times, result in wider societal benefit.

This is an American sentiment. Please look abroad.

Nobody anywhere would argue with "people do bad things", but people where I am would be puzzled if that was your only assessment.

We do things here for the betterment of society not just because it's "the right thing" morally, but because it's the right thing practically. It benefits _us_. We're part of society.

This kind of pragmatic morality is smeared as socialism by the USA, by the people who stand to lose their near total control of the country.

And P.S. we're all the same, there's nothing special about Europe. You can have this too, without losing your freedoms (which by the way, we also have!). And we also have bad people, it's just that we see them as the exceptions, not the norm.

Re: Ask HN: Has your view of Silicon Valley changed in the last 72 hours?

#80

Post by rich_sasha »

It feels to me like the whole startup economy is essentially built on making regular people take enormous risks with their lives.

R&D used to be quite conservative and limited, true, but conducted by deep-pocketed companies or governments. Now people are encouraged to take the risks themselves, live a precarious life funding round to funding round, encouraged by a massive but distant carrot most people never even smell.

SVB feels like another part on this play. It reads to me like their business model barely made sense - but so what? It would pay while the music is playing, and if it fails, the bag holders are the same start-up hopefuls.

I totally think there is a niche for startups, and people who are well-suited to work there, but not at the levels we are seeing. Anyone who can hold a broom is told to set up an "Uber for cleaning" or whatever, and that's not a good idea.

Post reply on HN