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

Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

bloombergview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 141 posts

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#91

Post by andyjohnson0 »

gbhn wrote: post #17
StandardFuture wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manhattan project, over half a million people working in cooperation to meet one end goal. The Apollo program, over half a million people working in cooperation to meet one end goal. How many people do Google, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle employ? Combined ? A single individual with a computer can be more productive than 100 individuals from any of those past projects. We walk around with more computer power in our pocket…

You might enjoy the book "Why the West Rules -- For Now" ( http://www.amazon.com/Why-West-Rules-Now-Patterns/dp/0312611... ) One of the main premises is that the impact of societies on other societies ("ruling" in the vernacular of the book, as this impact has often been military and brutal in the time scale the book covers) has a lot to do with the kind of social organization they are able to use. There's amplifiers…

The author gave an talk to the Long Now Foundation a few years ago. Audio stream/download is at [1]. I found it interesting, and he was an engaging speaker.

[1] http://longnow.org/seminars/02011/apr/13/why-west-rules-now/

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#92

Post by byEngineer »

I dont't want to be politically judged by HN audience. But, I will tell you this: don't you see that start-ups and innovation happen around things that are the least regulated by the Government. Things with the least amount of required bureaucracy and compliance to the state regulations?

Peter Schiff - opened hedge fund from his bedroom. He got lucky, worked had, whatever, his investment company is doing pretty good nowadays. But he will tell you one thing - if he wanted to open a brokerage firm from his bedroom today, it would be impossible due to all the regulation imposed on the financial markets. Putting aside that this way the regulation protects established big financial institutions from new competition, this also kills innovation.

What isn't regulated by the Government? Internet start-ups. I can work in my bedroom on a new search engine (currently). Or on mobile app. But try to open brokerage firm.

There is a reason for which still more innovation happens in the USA than in much more heavily regulated EU. Spoke to fashion designer from Paris in New York the other day. He lives in New York. Why? Because to open a fashion shop in Paris requires fee to the government to the tune of 15,000 Euros. Nobody in New York ask him to pay 20,000 usd to the city for the privilege of opening business.

The moment they will start regulating web - the party will be over! What about 10,000 usd fee to open a commercial website? Would you be surprised there is innovation in the web ?

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#93

Post by tomohawk »

Animats wrote: post #67

Thiel has some good points about the lack of progress. Rocketry is only slightly better than it was 45 years ago. We've hit the limit of chemical fuels, and weight reduction can only go so far. In comparison, 45 years took us from the Wright Flyer to the first jet aircraft. Fission power isn't much further along than it was 45 years ago, either. Nor is fusion power. Nor is power transmission. At the high-power end of…

Mostly agree, but economical high voltage DC is a definite improvement in power transmission.

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#94

Post by byEngineer »

sitkack wrote: post #87
cpeterso wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIU, Thiel doesn't say monopolies are good. He says the pursuit of monopolies drives progress: “Monopolies drive progress. The promise of years or even decades of monopoly profits provides a powerful incentive to innovate.” http://www.technologyreview.com/review/531491/the-contrarian...

This idea is frankly retarded. I am not saying you have had it. This is directed at You. To say that monopolies drive progress strikes me as an anthropomorphisation of the motivations of innovators. Did AT&T Microsoft and Ford drive progress? Hardly. They existed when progress occurred but to attribute it do them is generous. Most progress is driven by the artists and scientists on the edge, they rarely see the fruit…

Funny you say this. I hate monopolies as the next guy. Reading Thiel's book right now. What he says is that monopolies can have luxury of innovation while in the perfect market conditions it is all about as low margin as possible without cash flying around to spend on extravaganza like innovation.

AT&T: telecommunications company that employed Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kerninghan to figure out software to play chess. Dudes created C language and UNIX OS in the process.

Which low margin cash-strived company will do extravagant stuff like that for kicks?

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#95

Post by david927 »

tlear wrote: post #27
danieltillett wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I thought the people like Moravec and Kurzweil were predicting 2030 to 2040? I have not seen any analysis from anyone that would push it off past 2100.

You might as well say that we gona create a Warp drive by 2100. Jump necessary for AI advancement makes settlement on Mars an easy problem. We are so far from that we really have no idea how far it is. Human level AI when it happens and it probably will will most likely be at a stage where current tech would seem something out of Ancient Greeks time if not Stone age.

No one knows. It's a black swan. It's not predictable as a rule.

I fully expect it within 30 years simply based on the rate of progression, overall (not in the field of AI specifically).

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#96

Post by tsotha »

byEngineer wrote: post #92

I dont't want to be politically judged by HN audience. But, I will tell you this: don't you see that start-ups and innovation happen around things that are the least regulated by the Government. Things with the least amount of required bureaucracy and compliance to the state regulations? Peter Schiff - opened hedge fund from his bedroom. He got lucky, worked had, whatever, his investment company is doing pretty good…

>But, I will tell you this: don't you see that start-ups and innovation happen around things that are the least regulated by the Government.

How would you know? Everything is regulated by the government.

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#97

Post by tsotha »

nhaehnle wrote: post #84
stillsut wrote: post #70

If you want Grand Engineering, why not get behind the Soviets? Their progress to space outclasses any other non-US country. So why is Russia a second world country, with world-class math, science, and comp-sci talent? Further: the 'softer' half of any Tech-accelerator - consumer apps or anything ad-based - would be a non-starter for venture capital if it were based in Russia. But Russians do have the ambition and ski…

Russia is a second world country because the terms "first world" and "second world" originated during the Cold War, with first world countries being aligned with the US and second world countries being aligned with Russia/the Soviet Union by definition . See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World The common use of these terms has since shifted in meaning. To be honest, I haven't really heard people use the term "se…

Even back then people hardly ever said it. You used to hear "first world" and "third world" a lot, but most people said "the Soviets" in lieu of "second world".

Never really thought to wonder why at the time.

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#99

Post by k-mcgrady »

byEngineer wrote: post #92

I dont't want to be politically judged by HN audience. But, I will tell you this: don't you see that start-ups and innovation happen around things that are the least regulated by the Government. Things with the least amount of required bureaucracy and compliance to the state regulations? Peter Schiff - opened hedge fund from his bedroom. He got lucky, worked had, whatever, his investment company is doing pretty good…

Yes, if you look at something from one angle and don't consider the others you will come to this conclusion. But there is a reason there is regulation in things like finance and health care. It is to protect people. Unfortunately there are people who lack the correct knowledge in certain areas to make smart decisions so we collectively help them through regulation. It also prevents companies from causing harm to people by cutting corners.

I'm not sure what 'fee to the government' for opening a shop in Paris was for but I'm guessing it's a tax. And in many European countries taxes pay for things like free health care and education. Both of these are things which I'm sure that fashion designer took advantage of but now that it's time to pay towards them through taxes he isn't happy?

'The web' doesn't need regulated. But startups in certain industries do. I want to be sure that a health care startup is providing me with safe equipment/drugs/advice and regulation is the only way to do this. Unfortunately the world is full of shitty people who would take advantage of others and ruin lives without it.

Now. I'm not saying loads of regulation is good but your idea that it is all bad isn't correct imo. It's necessary in certain areas. Maybe not in an ideal world, but we don't live in one.

Re: Peter Thiel Is Wrong About the Future

#100

Post by tsotha »

sytelus wrote: post #86

The most depressing thing is that our generation can achieve so much more. We have more scientists, more engineers and much larger economies than babyboomer generation. But most of these money ends up corruption in underdeveloped countries and in wars and busted healthcare system in developed countries. For example US spent 1 trillion dollars [1] just for stupid Iraq war alone . With same amount of money we could hav…

>The most depressing thing is that our generation can achieve so much more. We have more scientists, more engineers and much larger economies than babyboomer generation.

You're proceeding from a false assumption here. The quality of your scientists matters far more than the quantity. The tail end of the curve is where you get the big breakthroughs, and those people are no more likely to be scientists than ever. Maybe less, since there's so much money to be made in Wall St.

And research was much more efficient back then. You could mix a bunch of nasty stuff together, get your results, and then dump the rest down the sink. It may not have been a good idea, but that's a whole lot cheaper than wading through the hazmat bureaucracies we have today today.

There are all kinds of ways a larger and more intrusive government "taxes" efficiency. Each regulation makes sense on its own, but add them all together and you have a big drag on progress. As the writer says, it's easier just to write software than to do anything in the physical world.

And the military spending point really favors the present. During the cold war we spent as much as 10% of GDP on the military trying to contain the Soviets. The Iraq war was nothing compared to that - we haven't spent more than 5% GDP on the military since the 90s.

Post reply on HN