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

Silicon Valley: Abandoned

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#31

Post by pg »

skmurphy wrote: post #23
Alex3917 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The Valley will not soon be displaced and will do just fine in spite of the larger economic problems" Which seems more likely in twenty years: A) The CA/US debt, education, and political problems will be fixed B) In the near future Boris Johnson or some other politician who 'gets it' is able to convince their government to pass a series of bills that create the same economic/social conditions that created SV, and ov…

Silicon Valley is more than 100 years old. I blogged about this in http://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2008/11/05/steve-blank-on-secre... but here is one quick data point: California Landmark NO. 836 PIONEER ELECTRONICS RESEARCH LABORATORY - This is the original site of the laboratory and factory of Federal Telegraph Company, founded in 1909 by Cyril F. Elwell. Here, Dr. Lee de Forest, inventor of the three-element radio va…

That is a somewhat misleading claim. Whatever area had turned out to be the center of the semiconductor industry, there would presumably have been some electronics firms there already.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#32

Post by gaius »

evgen wrote: post #30
gaius wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

talented entrepreneurs, monied investors, academic expertise, and, above all, critical relationships with those who know startups well and are integrally involved in launching and promoting them Silicon Valley had none of that before Shockley and the Fairchildren (AKA tha Traitorous 8) rolled into town back in '57. Was that truly a one-off? The world's a big place.

And Hollywood was nothing more than orange groves outside of Los Angeles before Lumiere invented the motion picture camera. Was that a one-off? So far that does seem to be the case. Lots of places will compete for the title of being the second-best version of "the center of the universe" for industry X, Y, or Z but there are very few examples of the center actually moving once it has established itself.

London wasn't always Europe's financial capital.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#33

Post by protomyth »

Alex3917 wrote: post #15
protomyth wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does the money driving the boom come from? I am unclear how increasing the cost of production of good and energy will generate an economic boom.

First, you're not increasing the cost of goods and energy, you're increasing the cost of carbon. The idea is that the money flows to whoever can create those goods and services using the least carbon. While the cost of goods does go up, the increase is minimal because the system is designed to find the least expensive solution. The money comes in because the entrepreneurs who are able to find the most cost-effective…

"First, you're not increasing the cost of goods and energy" ... "While the cost of goods does go up"

An input cost to production (energy) will rise in price. This will increase the cost of goods and services. This is basic economics. This new "market" is a drain on other parts of the economy in both money and talent.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#34

Post by anamax »

Alex3917 wrote: post #8
anamax wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cap-and-trade is basically the last chance to fix the economy of the valley, and frankly it's not looking for good right now. Cap-and-trade is intended to increase govt control and pass out goodies to well-connected folks. It's unclear how either of those will "fix the valley". (Yes, there are well-connected folks in the valley who will benefit, but ....)

It's unfortunate that it has proved impossible to get a bill through the house/senate without adding various handouts for specific industries or even companies. That being said, creating a system that assigns a monetary value to each ton of carbon will still create the biggest economic boom in US history. What's more, like the dotcom boom it will be one that anyone can participate in, not just those who are well conn…

> It's unfortunate that it has proved impossible to get a bill through the house/senate without adding various handouts for specific industries or even companies.

Interestingly enough, I wasn't referring to the explicit graft, but now that you mention it....

> What's more, like the dotcom boom it will be one that anyone can participate in, not just those who are well connected to the government or whatever.

Wrong.

Read the damn thing. That's not how it works. That's not even how the theoretical best version works.

Cap and trade is a bunch of folks wandering around saying "that's worth $" and "you owe $". The excuse is carbon, but there's no actual connection between carbon and where those folks utter those sentences and the dollar figures.

Don't believe me? Notice that we're not charging immigrants. We're not charging parents. The accounting for agriculture is impossible.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#35

Post by anamax »

antonovka wrote: post #21
perkoff wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "tons of highly intelligent and competent people" will probably not sit down and roll their fingers in either case. Rather, programs like this drains brain power from other sectors of the economy. There is an alternative usage for most resources! ANY new program would not increase our wealth. Building pyramids, for example, is just a waste of resources. Even if it would "create" a great deal of jobs for constru…

Even if it would "create" a great deal of jobs for construction engineers, it would take away resources from _useful_ production. In the U.S., we have no shortage of "useful" production, and no shortage of not-very-useful production (see also: Cougartown). Reducing pollution is useful production. I appreciate the idea that we'll assign a cost to traditional externalities whose cost is usually foisted on society at la…

> It will also force incumbent, stagnant industries to invest in research and development, and disperse wealth more broadly, both of which pay significant future dividends beyond simply a reduction carbon output.

"force to invest" concedes the argument that these "investments" don't make any economic sense absent artificial costs, aka a govt mandate. As a result, the resources used by these "investments" would have been better used elsewhere.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#36

Post by anamax »

Alex3917 wrote: post #22
perkoff wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "tons of highly intelligent and competent people" will probably not sit down and roll their fingers in either case. Rather, programs like this drains brain power from other sectors of the economy. There is an alternative usage for most resources! ANY new program would not increase our wealth. Building pyramids, for example, is just a waste of resources. Even if it would "create" a great deal of jobs for constru…

Right, well first we have to decide that the products and services created by cap-and-trade are a good use of our country's talent and resources. That's an entirely separate debate, but once we've already decided that then the broken window analogy no longer applies.

> Right, well first we have to decide that the products and services created by cap-and-trade are a good use of our country's talent and resources. That's an entirely separate debate, but once we've already decided that then the broken window analogy no longer applies.

Um, no. The broken window analogy applies whenever you artifically impose costs. Let's rewrite the above to see why.

Right, well first we have to decide that the products and services created by the increased need for glass cause by the glass-corp smashing windowsare a good use of our country's talent and resources. That's an entirely separate debate, but once we've already decided that then the broken window analogy no longer applies.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#37

Post by antonovka »

anamax wrote: post #35
antonovka wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it would "create" a great deal of jobs for construction engineers, it would take away resources from _useful_ production. In the U.S., we have no shortage of "useful" production, and no shortage of not-very-useful production (see also: Cougartown). Reducing pollution is useful production. I appreciate the idea that we'll assign a cost to traditional externalities whose cost is usually foisted on society at la…

> It will also force incumbent, stagnant industries to invest in research and development, and disperse wealth more broadly, both of which pay significant future dividends beyond simply a reduction carbon output. "force to invest" concedes the argument that these "investments" don't make any economic sense absent artificial costs, aka a govt mandate. As a result, the resources used by these "investments" would have b…

"force to invest" concedes the argument that these "investments" don't make any economic sense absent artificial costs, aka a govt mandate. As a result, the resources used by these "investments" would have been better used elsewhere.

You're twisting an out of context quote to provide a stupid strawman worthy of attacking with your worldview.

... these "investments" don't make any economic sense absent artificial costs, aka a govt mandate.

There are real costs to pollution (pollution is not 'artificial'), but those costs are levied against communities (and world) without any recourse against those who externalize them.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#38

Post by skmurphy »

pg wrote: post #31
skmurphy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silicon Valley is more than 100 years old. I blogged about this in http://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2008/11/05/steve-blank-on-secre... but here is one quick data point: California Landmark NO. 836 PIONEER ELECTRONICS RESEARCH LABORATORY - This is the original site of the laboratory and factory of Federal Telegraph Company, founded in 1909 by Cyril F. Elwell. Here, Dr. Lee de Forest, inventor of the three-element radio va…

That is a somewhat misleading claim. Whatever area had turned out to be the center of the semiconductor industry, there would presumably have been some electronics firms there already.

My argument is not that Silicon Valley was inevitable but that it takes a long time to grow an entrepreneurial region.

It's not misleading in raising the bar to areas/regions that want to be the next Silicon Valley and don't have an entrepreneurial substrate and appropriate ancillary services (e.g. attorneys, accountants, banks, that understand startups and entrepreneurs) to form a viable ecosystem.

I don't think the 100 years is misleading, if it had happened somewhere else (e.g. Boston) I think it would still have involved the same antecedents: major universities, risk capital, electronics firms...It may also have been important that it was primarily agricultural land that was pushed aside, if there had been other active industries they may have preferentially competed for the same talent.

Three good books I rely on for this analysis are

"Understanding Silicon Valley" by Kenney http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Silicon-Valley-Entrepren...

"The Silicon Valley Edge" by Lee, Miller, Hancock, and Rowen http://www.amazon.com/Silicon-Valley-Edge-Innovation-Entrepr...

"Regional Advantage" Saxenian http://www.amazon.com/Regional-Advantage-Culture-Competition...

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#39

Post by skmurphy »

gaius wrote: post #24
grellas wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Valley will not soon be displaced and will do just fine in spite of the larger economic problems - nowhere else in the world will one find such an aggregation of talented entrepreneurs, monied investors, academic expertise, and, above all, critical relationships with those who know startups well and are integrally involved in launching and promoting them. With every cycle (I have seen them all), the Valley takes…

talented entrepreneurs, monied investors, academic expertise, and, above all, critical relationships with those who know startups well and are integrally involved in launching and promoting them Silicon Valley had none of that before Shockley and the Fairchildren (AKA tha Traitorous 8) rolled into town back in '57. Was that truly a one-off? The world's a big place.

I believe that both Federal Radio (1909) and Hewlett Packard (1939) benefited from talented entrepreneurial engineers, risk capital, academic expertise, and a deep understanding of how to foster innovation not just manage invention.

Re: Silicon Valley: Abandoned

#40

Post by bokonist »

pg wrote: post #29
Alex3917 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The Valley will not soon be displaced and will do just fine in spite of the larger economic problems" Which seems more likely in twenty years: A) The CA/US debt, education, and political problems will be fixed B) In the near future Boris Johnson or some other politician who 'gets it' is able to convince their government to pass a series of bills that create the same economic/social conditions that created SV, and ov…

Unquestionably A), because whatever the likelihood of that, it is more likely than politicians creating a Silicon Valley.

China already has a Silicon Valley in progress - Pudong New District - and it's growing rapidly ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pudong , http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/191907622_... ). The Pearl Delta region is also an entrepreneurial hotbed.

(although wouldn't call Chinese officials politicians, so your point technically stands)

Post reply on HN