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

71–80 of 106 posts

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#71

Post by eli_gottlieb »

natrius wrote: post #66
rayiner wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't understand why you think it's instructive to compare government investments to venture capital. The government engages in plenty of investments, and none of them operate that way.

Because the government chooses not to monetize and propertize them that way. In a very real sense, the government has ownership rights to a massive amount of valuable stuff and writes it off their books every year.

The easiest example is how logging rights in federal lands are basically given away for near-free rather than sold at a market rate for a profit to the government.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#72

Post by zt »

jacoblyles wrote: post #49

It surely is embarrassing that California's two senators were strong supporters of PIPA and that they are still in office. Silicon Valley is sending a strong message - "Mess with us, and we'll be very angry for about 4 days. Then we'll go back to trying to get rich." If the Tea Party could throw out dozens of fiscal moderate Republicans from the Congressional caucus, surely we - the technically savvy citizens of Sili…

Yes, exactly.

Just as a simple example, Nancy Pelosi might retire in the next few years (I'm skeptical that D's are going to retake the house in 2014), if that's the case where is the developer/entrepreneur candidate for that seat?

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#73

Post by eli_gottlieb »

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…

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.

And this is also the basic root of most of what's wrong with the United States. There is not always another Western frontier freshly depopulated by mutated smallpox.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#74

Post by zt »

5vforest wrote: post #48

I really enjoyed this post, and I have a few reactions to it. The author is lobbying for online advocacy, which I hate to say, will not be fruitful without some kind of major political shift in our country's political processes and institutions. Our two-party system doesn't allow for a member of congress to suddenly say "I'm going to let my constituents decide how I vote on each bill." I'm sure it angers some when I…

I think government is starting to move. We could cite CTO Park and the Presidential Innovation Fellows program as you have, but also mention Brett Goldstein (CIO) and John Tolva (CTO) in Chicago, Rachel Sterne (Chief Digital Officer) in New York City, the Offices of New Urban Mechanics in Boston and Philly, etc. But, in general, I think revolutions rarely come from within and that addressing apathy in the technological class is a method through which we could see a lot more change in the way our governments functions.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#75

Post by eli_gottlieb »

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 making excuses.

Centralized institutions and intermediaries are necessary to running an enterprise, namely society, that contains everyone.

You're not solving the problem of broken institutions, you're just coding workaround after workaround. Eventually, the workarounds collapse under their own weight and are labeled Windows ME.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#76

Post by mamby »

edj wrote: post #57
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

Hey,the problem is the reality is different... I'm an African too and charities, help, blah blah are failures!

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#77

Post by zt »

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…

Well, we can disagree whether moving a little farther west is really the underpinning idea in US governance. I think that question was basically settled in the Whiskey Rebellion: there was never some idyllic period of liberty in American history where the government just was not on people's back.

Developers and entrepreneurs seem to too often live under this false notion that just because they can build things easily--literally our whole lives have been animated by the fact that we can just make a computer do nearly whatever we want--that somehow that is true for everyone in our society. A world with perfect liberty is a naturally unequal one--and the government can do a lot that is not telling "us what to do" that can address the worst examples of the inequity with a smaller proportionate decrease in overall liberty.

But, I digress in to the deepest and most fundamental question in western political philosophy, so let me move on to simply say what's below.

The federal government exists. It has immense powers. State and local governments exist. They have immense powers. Those things are not changing in our society any time soon (even with sequestration).

Given that fact, I think we're presented with two choices. We can either try to make government work better or we can ignore it. Either way it exists and affects our lives. I, for one, think it might be better if people like the folks on HN (libertarians, liberals, and everyone else) took part in the rule-making, the regulation, the laws, and the services that come out of our government. That we made sure that the folks who opine on the future of the internet were at least cursorily aware of its functioning, etc.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#78

Post by javajosh »

fatbird wrote: post #41
javajosh wrote: post #29

This post sucks. There are a lot of reasons for sucking, such as describing a non-problem. That's not this posts problem. This posts problem is that it describes a very real problem, and then basically throws up it's hands in defeat. That's actually worse than not saying anything at all, as it leaves the reader upset, but with no balm for the wound. Thanks for wounding me and not giving me a bandage. Or, as I've hear…

stop writing posts describing problems that you have no ability, no ideas, and no real capability to solve. This is a moronic thing to say. First, diagnosis is valuable in and of itself. Second, awareness of a problem shouldn't wait on a solution. Third, you're basically saying that, for any problem beyond a certain individually-addressable size, just don't talk about it because the author can't do anything about it.…

a) that's an ad hominim. I never attacked the author, and you are attacking me. Apology accepted in advance.

b) there is a large class of problem which only induces anxiety. For example, lamenting the "disconnection" between people in a modern, technology mediated society (which is a lament that's been going since the industrial revolution, and is no less valid now as then).

When we accept that large, impersonal forces shape the world in ways that, when we are thoughtful enough, realize are wrong or flawed, then we give up personal agency in fixing the problem. When you see a large, impersonal force causing a large, impersonal problem, the correct action is to file it away and keep your eyes open for opportunities to help people who both see the problem and have a solution.

That's just how I feel about the matter; others are welcome to have different beliefs.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#79

Post by jsherwani »

Cell phones may have done more for international development than charity, but that's a great example of improving things by accident rather than by design.

I moved to the Bay Area to start a startup, before which I worked on international development issues, and having seen both sides of the coin, I totally agree with the author's views.

It would be great if we could harness some of our technological expertise to engage directly with the world's problems, starting at the problems rather than our own individual itches. This is something I personally intend to do in the future, and I would love to engage with others that are interested in doing so too.

In fact, a few years ago, my co-founder and I thought about doing something for-impact rather than for-profit, and we volunteered with Khan Academy (when they didn't have funding), but quickly found that you can't do a great job on something unless it's the main thing you're working on (PG's "top idea in your mind" concept totally applies).

One great example of using technology for social change is SamaSource [http://samasource.org] — I'm a huge fan of their work and the founder's politics.

Re: Silicon Valley's Problem

#80

Post by martythemaniak »

zt wrote: post #69

So, as I read through the comments on this post I see a lot of indifference to her argument and a lot of anger toward the government. Government is broken. Government uses outdated, bespoke technology from the 90s. Technology is not a priority. Government is inefficient. (I could say the same things about much of the not-for-profit community as well). Those are all true, but that's partially because the exact people…

I wish I could vote with my karma and send your post to the top of HN.
Post reply on HN