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

Silicon Valley's Problem

cbracy.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 106 posts

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#51

Post by natrius »

rayiner wrote: post #12
fleitz wrote: post #6

The underpinning idea in US governance is the idea that if you don't like the society you live in you can build a new one a little further out west. Until seasteading becomes feasible SF/the internet is as west as it gets. Amazingly, or unsurprisingly to libertarians, we can build our own society with out government telling us what to do. What is wrong with people solving their own problems rather than lobbying gover…

It's particularly hilarious because the west coast wouldn't exist without massive federal investment over decades. From getting people out there to irrigating what is mostly a desolate wasteland, places like Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Southern California are creatures of federal investment.

Southern California has paid off that investment many times over, and Nevada and Arizona probably have as well.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#52

Post by [deleted] »

RyanZAG wrote: post #13

Meh. The Silicon Valley rich are famously stingy philanthropists and a defense I’ve heard more than once is that the tools they spend their time building are inherently good. “Why donate money when people can just download my app and instantly have a better life?” Maybe I have a different view on the this from most on HA as I live in Africa, but products like cheaper cellphones have had a far more massive effect for…

[deleted]

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#53

Post by jacoblyles »

cbracy wrote: post #22
WiseWeasel wrote: post #18

My impression is that the tech culture pervading SV is built on a foundation of decentralized problem solving on a global scale, finding people who share an interest in the solution to some problem they're faced with, and working towards that solution with them. Intermediaries such as NGOs and governing bodies are not valued, because their operation isn't transparent or accessible. National borders and the government…

I think you're misunderstanding. I think it's exactly that decentralized, networked approach to problem-solving that holds the potential for technologists to fix big problems. The issue is that in SV most are not focusing on those problems. I WANT the tech community disrupting those old institutions, and I'm frustrated we're not doing more of it.

I absolutely agree. I love the Silicon Valley mindset. But I despair at how inward-facing it is. When I read about pockets of SV culture popping up in other places I cheer, such as an article the other day about a hacker culture forming in Kenya. Those hackers are applying this wonderful decentralized way of solving problems to high-priority problems in the world. In California, we are so far up Maslow's hierarchy of needs that the "problems" we try to address are mostly comical (e.g. I have too many social networks! I need an app to help me browse them).

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#54

Post by orionblastar »

Synthetase wrote: post #36
cbracy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry. You're right. But I don't think I'm throwing up my hands. I think there are many solutions and certainly not ones that are easily laid out as a final paragraph in a post like this. I'll definitely follow up when I think I have ideas (or share other good ones when I see them) but for me this post was an important first step to clarify my thinking about what the problem is.

If it's such a huge problem why don't you go fix it? Or are you volunteering other peoples time?

It takes more than one person to fix this mess.

For example it takes having not only a working business plan, but a working business plan that makes sense.

For example it takes a quality control, six sigma program to make sure hardware and software costs less to support than the revenue it brings in.

For example it takes VCs not afraid of investing in teams and organizations of people not heard of before, that have good ideas, but need to hire experienced people to guide them.

For example it requires companies to hire more people in the USA instead of offshoring to cheaper labor markets in foreign nations. Make it affordable by doing cross-training of different factory positions like New Balance Shoes does, only do it for hardware.

For example it takes people who actually know how to run a business instead of the inner circle of elite social kliks who either lack degrees or have the wrong ones.

For example it takes giving the public what they want, instead of telling them what they want and changing how your product works just because it has a 'new look' or is 'shiny' but confuses a majority of the users. (Windows 8/RT)

For example it takes reforming the way business is done in SV, end the overpaying of executives (esp when the company turns a loss) and make executive pay based on how profitable the company is, and pay the employees more salary with better benefits by cutting executive salaries.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#55

Post by cbracy »

thematt wrote: post #46
cbracy wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's my responsibility too. I'm working on it. Just coming off the Obama campaign and rolling into a new gig in the coming weeks. Not ready to announce it yet, but I'm proud of it and think it's part of the solution.

When you were on the Obama campaign trail were you voicing opposition to his policies? Specifically FISA?

No, I wasn't. I wanted him to win--and am so glad he did--and criticizing him on FISA would have been counterproductive at best. I don't agree with every one of the hundreds of positions he's taken, but I'm not a one-issue voter. Despite his flaws and disagreements I have with him on some issues, he's probably the best President I'll ever see in my lifetime. Helping to get him re-elected is one of the greatest things I'll ever do.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#56

Post by edj »

fatbird wrote: post #38
RyanZAG wrote: post #13

Meh. The Silicon Valley rich are famously stingy philanthropists and a defense I’ve heard more than once is that the tools they spend their time building are inherently good. “Why donate money when people can just download my app and instantly have a better life?” Maybe I have a different view on the this from most on HA as I live in Africa, but products like cheaper cellphones have had a far more massive effect for…

Philanthropy and charity aren't the same thing. The Gates Foundation does much, much more than just walk around handing out cheques. I'm not even sure they do charity in any significant way, but the money they're putting towards, for example, vaccinating large numbers against the rotavirus, is hugely effective in actually improving things. You can't partake of the global economy when you're shitting yourself to death…

Philanthropy and charity aren't the same thing.

I think they're more alike than different. They have in common the act of giving for the benefit of others. From the Oxford English Dictionary:

Charity. a) Beneficence; liberality to or provision for those in need or distress; alms-giving. b) Money, a gift, or other assistance to relieve need or distress. c) A trust, foundation, organization, etc., for the benefit of those in need or distress; such trusts, etc. viewed collectively.

Philanthropy. Love of human kind; the disposition or effort to promote the happiness and well-being of one's fellow people; practical benevolence.

The difference between the Gates Foundation and other charities is not that it does "philanthropy" rather than "charity"; it's that it operates on a much larger scale and with a greater emphasis on measurement and accountability than do most other charities.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#57

Post by edj »

RyanZAG wrote: post #13

Meh. The Silicon Valley rich are famously stingy philanthropists and a defense I’ve heard more than once is that the tools they spend their time building are inherently good. “Why donate money when people can just download my app and instantly have a better life?” Maybe I have a different view on the this from most on HA as I live in Africa, but products like cheaper cellphones have had a far more massive effect for…

Charities in general have almost no effect on the ground.

That's an extremely bold statement. Do you have any evidence to back it up?

Counterexamples are numerous: Carnegie libraries [1], needle exchanges[2], the Gates Foundation [3].... the list is long.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_library

[2]: http://www.avert.org/needle-exchange.htm

[3]: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#58

Post by namank »

Actually, that is exactly why I like SV.

It's about the ecosystem, not the players. The kind of problems the author talks about are offshoots in an ecosystem that is built to develop and sustain massively huge ideas. This is not only expected but required to keep ecosystem healthy. Can you imagine if there were no such companies and only 15 ideal ones? It would make for a very unhealthy startup land because startup is about trying new things, ideal or not.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#59

Post by rayiner »

natrius wrote: post #51
rayiner wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's particularly hilarious because the west coast wouldn't exist without massive federal investment over decades. From getting people out there to irrigating what is mostly a desolate wasteland, places like Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Southern California are creatures of federal investment.

Southern California has paid off that investment many times over, and Nevada and Arizona probably have as well.

That's not how investments work. If someone invests $100,000 in your startup, and you IPO for $10 billion, you don't just pay back $100,000 and call it even. The way I see it, the federal government should own basically half of California.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#60

Post by jfb »

cbracy wrote: post #30
shashashasha wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I think one issue is actually Silicon Valley's model of "disruption" — ie new solutions replace old ones. For example, instead of fixing public transit in San Francisco (or SF -> SV) we now have all of these new private infrastructures for transit within SF (Uber, Lyft, Cabulous, etc) and SF -> SV (all those shuttles, see: http://stamen.com/zero1/ ). What happens then is that…

Completely 100% agree with you, and have been mildly obsessed with Uber and other ride-sharing apps since I moved here because of their conflict with city government and the implications they have for public transportation. One of the most jarring San Francisco experiences I had when I first got here was getting off Mission/16th BART and then walking a block to Valencia street. The difference that block makes is a go…

Of course, that sort of extreme income gradient exists in a lot of cities, and predates any one particular industry -- try walking south from the University of Chicago buildings to 63rd street to see a non-SF example.
Post reply on HN