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

It’s Time to Build

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: It’s Time to Build

#411

Post by pdonis »

KirinDave wrote: post #167

I find this essay to be extremely frustrating, and a good example of the attitude I've personally witnessed Andreessen have in the few interactions I've had with him directly. > Is the problem capitalism? I’m with Nicholas Stern when he says that capitalism is how we take care of people we don’t know — all of these fields are highly lucrative already and should be prime stomping grounds for capitalist investment, goo…

> This overlooks the fact that Marc is in fact one of these folks who has a profoundly outsized role in deciding what he wants.

He says what he wants, but then he expects someone else to build it. He's rich: if he wants these things, why doesn't he just pay to get them built? Sure, not all of them, but just pick one and pay to get it built.

But, as you point out, he's not interested in long term investments--and that is the root of the problem. The very people who are the most suited to making long term investments--people who have enough wealth that they don't have to answer to anyone else's expectations for earnings, profits, whatever--are incapable of making long term investments.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#413

Post by arthurcolle »

KirinDave wrote: post #293
hdbdidusn wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t mind me asking, what radio group are you involved with? I’m been working on some tangentially related projects and would love to be involved. Apologies for the new HN account, lost my password for my main one somehow.

Please see sfwem.org. It is not my project but I've pushed it heavily and recruited for it.

that site links to nothing, you sure you got the URL right?

Re: It’s Time to Build

#414

Post by renewiltord »

CyanLite4 wrote: post #322
BurningFrog wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can we change incentives for lawmakers?

Congress has a 20% approval rating, polled weekly for over the past decade. Yet we vote every two years for the same folks who give us the same results. The problem isn’t them. It’s us.

Why does US Congress approval rating matter? If I considered my congressperson 100/100 and everyone else 0/100, the House would get an overall rating of around zero.

Obviously since I can't elect members of the House of Representatives from other districts, I could totally approve of my congressperson and senator and it still not be my fault for the other guys in power.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#415

Post by KirinDave »

darawk wrote: post #304
wwweston wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Markets build in response to incentives. Most American production choices are determined by markets, including the choices of investors allocating capital. Public institutions build and manage in response to electoral incentives. If we're not prepared, it's because the incentives are wrong. On the market front, once incentives and maybe even insights become opaque at the level of the abstraction of return on inv…

> Markets build in response to incentives. Most American production choices are determined by markets, including the choices of investors allocating capital. This leaves out the most important problem though: regulatory capture and bureaucratic gridlock. Markets would love to build more housing. But they're prevented from doing so by the regulatory state. Markets would love to build nuclear power plants, but they're…

> Markets would love to build more housing... But they're prevented from doing so by the regulatory state

Interesting claim. Do you want to detail this more? Most of my experience is not with the State itself being an obstacle, but as a tool in the hands of landlords and capitalists to help enforce scarcity.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#416

Post by multiplegeorges »

tathougies wrote: post #69
multiplegeorges wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Regulatory capture is something the right is adamantly against usually. I mean, most right-leaning politicians in America are into reducing regulation. Getting rid of regulation is the ultimate regulatory capture.

Can you explain rather than simply state? Regulatory capture typically refers to regulations entrenching current players and increasing barriers to entry. By definition, less regulation, lowers barriers to entry of new participants. You surely cannot actually believe that no regulation increases barriers to entry of certain industries?

My understanding of regulatory capture is when the regulatory decision makers are beholden or acting in concert with those they purport to regulate.

Most voters think that some level of regulation is beneficial and support it. Politicians who advocate for the complete removal of regulations don't usually do well in the polls, but this is a widely held belief in right-wing thought. The market will do all the regulating necessary. This has quite obviously been proven incorrect over the years. Nevertheless, the idea persists.

The next most effective way to have no regulations is to keep the appearance of regulations and have the enforcers be completely ineffectual, thus regulatory capture.

So, you end up with the externally perverse-looking, but internally consistent situation where the right will support regulators' existence and even promote their people into those institutions.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#417

Post by notacoward »

It seems a bit too easy to challenge the left to show that the public sector can do amazing things ... when the public sector doesn't have the freedom of action we've given to the private sector, and the left isn't even in control of it right now. "Come on, let's fight, you with your hands tied, and see who's better." Cheap shot, Marc.

Point the second: of course a VC wants people to build. Of course a VC wants creative destruction and displacement of incumbents. But - as I see other people wondering as well - what's a VC going to do about it other than sit on the highest stock tranches and reap most of the rewards?

Re: It’s Time to Build

#418

Post by taurath »

One wishes there was a more direct call to action here. It reads like a general complaint about how things work and doesn’t really get the ball rolling.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#419

Post by kebman »

tekdude wrote: post #388

Regulatory capture is indeed a major underlying cause of a lot of the issues, but who will actually do the political work to fight against it? Someone spent money to capture the regulations in the first place, through lobbying and campaign donations. Who will spend the money to lobby and donate for the cause of undoing that? The "builders"? No, their focus and limited capital is spent on whatever it is they are worki…

Oh, so you think you can just turn off state run corruption? Good luck mate! :) Well, I mean, sure, you can always try to keep the door from revolving, I guess. It would be a start, but I doubt it will do much difference.

Re: It’s Time to Build

#420

Post by kick »

TheDong wrote: post #354
kick wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're actually set on the ideas laid out there, don't join a pre-existing company . Find a domain you're passionate about advancing, learn what you need to validate your hypothesis on improvement, then do what you need to do to advance it. If you don't have any passion about whatever you'd be doing, there's not really any point; the world doesn't advance because of people who don't care about what they're doing.…

The parent comment is asking for tractable ways for a person to help improve things. Starting a company is not tractable for almost anyone. If you have kids, are poor, etc, you need some form of income. If you don't fit the right mold, you're unlikely to get VCs to invest in you. Starting a company is not a feasible option for most people, and the average company fails and ends up causing nothing but harm for all inv…

A software engineer is privileged. You're acting as if he or she was a fast-food worker. If you want to actually change things, you've got to use what privilege you have to advance things.
Post reply on HN