Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

wsj.com

341–350 of 359 posts

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#341
post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so funny to imply that you (living in East Jesus, Texas) have a better or similar opportunity to me (living in SF) in making more relationships and connections to AI related companies, engineers, investors, customers, acquirers, scientists, etc.

I live a lot further from SF than Texas, yet I've been working fully remote for SF tech companies (among others) for 10+ years. If I need to meet someone in person, I make a trip (~few times a year) It's true that I can't brownnose/service random tech talking heads in person on a daily basis tho, which is what I assume you mean by 'relationships and connections' lmao

Okay so what you're doing is contradicting the objective advantages/benefits of living near the epicenter of a specific industry with a purely anecdotal example of 10+ years experience in jobs from said epicenter, with the expendable income to travel (domestic/international) for in-person meetings, then defining networking to a disingenuously generalization because it reinforces your opinion.

What if I were to tell you that you can make meaningful relationships and connections w/o "brown nosing/servicing" and its easier to do so in the center of a specific industry?

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#342
post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. No one is arguing the historical & material reasons as to why Bay Area is the birthing place of many technological revolutions. The Bay Area is special because of said history/staying power - which has systemic downstream advantages that cannot be replicated. 60% of total VC funding is in the Bay Area alone. Being surrounded by Stanford, Berkeley, etc gives the region a constant flow of world class engineers…

> No one is arguing the historical & material reasons as to why Bay Area is the birthing place of many technological revolutions. You're kinda missing the bigger picture - the fact that Bay Area was not always a tech hub, and became one at some point for various reason - which can happen in any other place (and has). > which has systemic downstream advantages that cannot be replicated. Seems like a very baseless and…

Yeah except for it has always been a tech hub because the term "tech hub" didn't exist before the Bay Area? I mean the first message sent over the precursor to the internet was from UCLA to the Stanford Research Institute in 1969, and the SF Bay Area having some of the first infrastructure for high-speed internet was a key factor into its position as the tech hub. Mind you this is all preceded by Hewlett Packard 30 years earlier setting the stage for the semiconductor revolution, and even this is preceded by 100 years with Leland Stanford. To much to talk about here as to why there is a unique mix of private capital, industry/government collusion, university research and development, and more that are entrenched in the region.

The makeup of tech companies employees doesn't remotely tell the full story of the advantages of the UC system, Stanford, and other universities in CA through research that feed into SV as the leading tech hub that cannot be replicated (See example of the invention of the internet above). I mean hell, 4 UC alum won nobel prizes this year alone, one of which was the chief scientist at Google's quantum AI.

But yeah sure, if we're talking in the context of "anything is possible" then yeah I concede, it can happen anywhere. Kind of a boring insight. The point is that no - it hasn't happened anywhere else to the extent of the bay area despite cities trying to for the past 30 years- and it won't happen for a very long time because of the converging mechanisms that took place over the past 100 years.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#343
post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one is arguing the historical & material reasons as to why Bay Area is the birthing place of many technological revolutions. You're kinda missing the bigger picture - the fact that Bay Area was not always a tech hub, and became one at some point for various reason - which can happen in any other place (and has). > which has systemic downstream advantages that cannot be replicated. Seems like a very baseless and…

Yeah except for it has always been a tech hub because the term "tech hub" didn't exist before the Bay Area? I mean the first message sent over the precursor to the internet was from UCLA to the Stanford Research Institute in 1969, and the SF Bay Area having some of the first infrastructure for high-speed internet was a key factor into its position as the tech hub. Mind you this is all preceded by Hewlett Packard 30 y…

Places where technological innovation and development happen have existed long before the internet and semiconductors. The industrial revolution didn't originate or center around the Bay Area.

> The makeup of tech companies employees doesn't remotely tell the full story...

What? You made the argument that Bay Area has some kind of special access to tech talent because of Stanford - I simply pointed out that the vast majority of Bay Area tech employees are not from Stanford (not to mention many Stanford alums leave California).

> UC system, Stanford, and other universities in CA through research that feed into SV as the leading tech hub that cannot be replicated

Really? MIT, Harvard, Yale, Georgia Tech, Waterloo don't exist?

> I mean hell, 4 UC alum won nobel prizes this year alone, one of which was the chief scientist at Google's quantum AI.

And several google/deepmind employees from/educated in UK won a nobel prize in 2024... what's your point?

> Kind of a boring insight.

Nah, the same old 'bay area cause bay area' insight is what's boring.

It was more true (but still very boring) 10 years ago, not anymore.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify is a profitable business now though right? Sure it doesn’t make huge profits due to paying out about 70% to larks but it’s finally profitable

Yes, barely, and after cutting revenue per stream to 1/4th of what it was. Many artists make negative money on Spotify, because you have to pay them to put your music on there. And then if Spotify thinks bots are listening to your streams, you have to pay them more. It's the same problem for Uber. Many Uber drivers make a negative wage. They don't know it, because nobody is going to tell them, but if you do the math,…

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to say that Spotify “cut” the revenue per stream. Spotify doesn’t have a fixed revenue per stream, payouts are dynamic and based on how much revenue it made and how many streams there are in total. Also Spotify gives something like 80% of its revenue to the music industry.

It’s essentially a pie that gets divided up amongst all artists by steam count. If your friend’s garage band are angry that they only get 0.001 cents per stream then they should be angry at Spotify listeners for streaming too much Taylor Swift!!!

Furthermore to pay the artists Spotify has to pay the labels and of course they take a giant cut. This trope of Spotify being an evil corporation is unfair

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#345
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah except for it has always been a tech hub because the term "tech hub" didn't exist before the Bay Area? I mean the first message sent over the precursor to the internet was from UCLA to the Stanford Research Institute in 1969, and the SF Bay Area having some of the first infrastructure for high-speed internet was a key factor into its position as the tech hub. Mind you this is all preceded by Hewlett Packard 30 y…

Places where technological innovation and development happen have existed long before the internet and semiconductors. The industrial revolution didn't originate or center around the Bay Area. > The makeup of tech companies employees doesn't remotely tell the full story... What? You made the argument that Bay Area has some kind of special access to tech talent because of Stanford - I simply pointed out that the vast…

> Places where technological innovation and development happen have existed long before the internet and semiconductors. The industrial revolution didn't originate or center around the Bay Area.

You said tech hub. By all definitions of the term the Bay Area was the first. Nor did I say the industrial revolution originated around the Bay Area?

> What? You made the argument that Bay Area has some kind of special access to tech talent because of Stanford - I simply pointed out that the vast majority of Bay Area tech employees are not from Stanford (not to mention many Stanford alums leave California).

You tend to do this a lot. "Many Stanford alums leave California" and "talent is being outsourced at ever increasing rates". Just vague generalizations that offer nothing to the overall conversation.

I made the argument that being close to these universities gives the region a constant flow of world class engineers and researchers. This is true whether or not they work for Bay Area tech companies you understand this right? Regardless, out of the reported feeder schools into tech 5 out of the top 10 are California universities.

> MIT, Harvard, Yale, Georgia Tech, Waterloo don't exist?

You just named universities from 5 different states/regions? Please keep up.

> And several google/deepmind employees from/educated in UK won a nobel prize in 2024... what's your point?

They weren't from the same school? The UC system altogether has over 150 nobel prizes and thats before including private institutions like Stanford, Caltech, USC, and others. Thus exemplifying the unique system dedicated to research and technology consolidated in one region..

> It was more true (but still very boring) 10 years ago, not anymore.

Going to be honest man from interacting with you it seems like you have a chip on your shoulder about the bay. I don't even live there I live in LA. It shouldn't bug you to point out the objective fact that the unique confluence of geographic location, surrounding education system and research institutions, compounded wealth from prior historical industrial/technological windfalls, makes SV the premiere tech hub that is consistently on the forefront of burgeoning technologies - not by accident.

Are you also confused as to why NYC is the finance capital of the world? Do you think Toronto could usurp it one day if they just try hard enough?

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#346
post #337
post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cool story I am not going to link you benchmarks or revenue numbers. You can find those yourself, if you actually care about being right. > It's funny that you don't see the contradiction. For the record, US manufacturing as a share of global manufacturing has significantly declined over the years. [0][1] Yes, because China is _cheap_ and _dense_ and has a billion newly-minted middle-class members. Do you expect th…

> Yes, that makes it nearly impossible for other places to become Shenzen. Even within China it's special. You're skipping n = 1 and jumping straight to k. How did modern Shenzen become what it is? Through specific reasons like infrastructure investment, or because it was always a 'manufacturing cluster'? By your logic Shenzen must have been the manufacturing hub of the world since before the dawn of time... since it…

> You're skipping n = 1 and jumping straight to k. How did modern Shenzen become what it is? Through specific reasons like infrastructure investment, or because it was always a 'manufacturing cluster'? By your logic Shenzen must have been the manufacturing hub of the world since before the dawn of time... since it's 'impossible for any place to become Shenzen'.

Sure, any region in a rapidly developing and very dense country, with a large preexisting financial hub nearby, 50 years ago, could have become Shenzen. There was only one of those, and consequently there is only one Shenzen. How far back do you want me to go? Should I discuss the agglomeration effects enjoyed by the Han Dynasty?

> Because the only way to meet and communicate in 2025 is in person?

Why don't you try using that logic on someone you're convincing to give you a large sum of money and report back? The real world does not work this way, and that is why there is still only one Silicon Valley. I've made this point several times now and can point to the status quo to back it up.

> All of these are better remote/digitally in most cases.

I work partially remote. I intentionally schedule my meetings in person because I find that to be significantly better than a video call. I am definitely not alone, and for startups it is even more advantageous to physically be in the same room as the entire rest of the company.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#347
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Places where technological innovation and development happen have existed long before the internet and semiconductors. The industrial revolution didn't originate or center around the Bay Area. > The makeup of tech companies employees doesn't remotely tell the full story... What? You made the argument that Bay Area has some kind of special access to tech talent because of Stanford - I simply pointed out that the vast…

> Places where technological innovation and development happen have existed long before the internet and semiconductors. The industrial revolution didn't originate or center around the Bay Area. You said tech hub. By all definitions of the term the Bay Area was the first. Nor did I say the industrial revolution originated around the Bay Area? > What? You made the argument that Bay Area has some kind of special access…

> You said tech hub.

No, you said tech hub. Which is short of 'technology hub', which is not just limited to mobile apps.

> You tend to do this a lot. "Many Stanford alums leave California" and "talent is being outsourced at ever increasing rates". Just vague generalizations that offer nothing to the overall conversation.

Those aren't generalizations, those are very specific statements, which go directly against your vague generalizations ('oh but there are good universities in the area for tech talent therefore its impossible to replicate'), and which you apparently can't disagree with because they are obviously true.

> I made the argument that being close to these universities gives the region a constant flow of world class engineers and researchers.

Nope, what you said is that because these universities are located in that area - no other region could possibly compete. And I gave you very specific examples of why that's not true.

> You just named universities from 5 different states/regions? Please keep up.

Yeah.. some of the leading universities for tech talent in the world... which are not in California... (which according to you is impossible)... please keep up.

> makes SV the premiere tech hub that is consistently on the forefront of burgeoning technologies

I never said SV is not a major tech hub. I actually said the opposite. What I disagreed with is your baseless assertion that no other region could possibly compete, or that tech companies have to be in SV to succeeded (which is obviously false, and which I see you shifting the goalposts on now)

> Are you also confused as to why NYC is the finance capital of the world?

Maybe you should rewind to back when NYC wasn't a major finance hub, then apply your same reasoning - 'NYC couldn't possibly become a finance hub, because London is the finance hub'.

Your arguments are self-contradictory and not logical.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#348
post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live a lot further from SF than Texas, yet I've been working fully remote for SF tech companies (among others) for 10+ years. If I need to meet someone in person, I make a trip (~few times a year) It's true that I can't brownnose/service random tech talking heads in person on a daily basis tho, which is what I assume you mean by 'relationships and connections' lmao

Okay so what you're doing is contradicting the objective advantages/benefits of living near the epicenter of a specific industry with a purely anecdotal example of 10+ years experience in jobs from said epicenter, with the expendable income to travel (domestic/international) for in-person meetings, then defining networking to a disingenuously generalization because it reinforces your opinion. What if I were to tell y…

I'm giving you a specific example of why it's not necessary to be in any particular location to work in tech, or network, collaborate, communicate with other tech people.

Directly contradicting your baseless assertion about how you have to be in SF for those reasons.

Literally a specific, physical example and you're talking about 'defining networking to a disingenuously generalization' ...

You are disingenuous.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#349
post #346
post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, that makes it nearly impossible for other places to become Shenzen. Even within China it's special. You're skipping n = 1 and jumping straight to k. How did modern Shenzen become what it is? Through specific reasons like infrastructure investment, or because it was always a 'manufacturing cluster'? By your logic Shenzen must have been the manufacturing hub of the world since before the dawn of time... since it…

> You're skipping n = 1 and jumping straight to k. How did modern Shenzen become what it is? Through specific reasons like infrastructure investment, or because it was always a 'manufacturing cluster'? By your logic Shenzen must have been the manufacturing hub of the world since before the dawn of time... since it's 'impossible for any place to become Shenzen'. Sure, any region in a rapidly developing and very dense…

> There was only one of those, and consequently there is only one Shenzen.

Really? There was only one rapidly developing, densely populated region with a financial hub nearby (why does the proximity of finance even matter?), in the entire world in the last 50 years (why 50 years)? Are you sure about that? (you are 100% wrong)

> I intentionally schedule my meetings in person because I find that to be significantly better than a video call.

Sounds like a you problem. Also the fact that you are 'partially remote' and you still schedule your meetings to be in person tells me: a) you do not have very many meetings b) you work with a fairly narrow scope of people who you can physically get into the same room on a regular basis.

I meet with founders, investors, tech leaders, and many various stakeholders on a regular basis. It would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to have these meetings in person.

> for startups it is even more advantageous to physically be in the same room as the entire rest of the company.

If you say so, but the record number of fully remote startups that keep popping up at ever increasing rates says the opposite.

> Why don't you try using that logic on someone you're convincing to give you a large sum of money and report back?

Been there done that. If you need to meet in person to make final agreements/sign you can travel. Vast majority of communications/negotiations around fundraising and related happens digitally today.

Re: OpenAI’s promise to stay in California helped clear the path for its IPO

#350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, barely, and after cutting revenue per stream to 1/4th of what it was. Many artists make negative money on Spotify, because you have to pay them to put your music on there. And then if Spotify thinks bots are listening to your streams, you have to pay them more. It's the same problem for Uber. Many Uber drivers make a negative wage. They don't know it, because nobody is going to tell them, but if you do the math,…

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to say that Spotify “cut” the revenue per stream. Spotify doesn’t have a fixed revenue per stream, payouts are dynamic and based on how much revenue it made and how many streams there are in total. Also Spotify gives something like 80% of its revenue to the music industry. It’s essentially a pie that gets divided up amongst all artists by steam count. If your friend’s garage band are a…

I don't think Spotify is evil, but I do think their business model doesn't make sense.

I mean, it sounds great. Pay 10-15 bucks a month and listen to all the music you want, whenever you want. What an amazing business idea!

But has anyone stepped back and asked if this is actually possible? Because when your artists are getting paid crumbs I don't see how this system continues.

Post reply on HN