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

The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 223 posts

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#91

Post by michaelochurch »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #89
michaelochurch wrote: post #72

Silicon Valley used to be a place with cheap land where people went because the cost of living was low, and they could tinker with cool ideas whereas, in the expensive East Coast cities, they'd have to work themselves to death just to tread water. California was this place where you could come and do cool stuff and build on land the East Coast elite didn't want. It's no longer cheap to live there. Tinkering with new…

It's no longer cheap to live there. Tinkering with new ideas on some modest amount of savings and "odd jobs" or consulting is no longer possible. Expensive real estate leads to calcification and risk-aversion and cultural death. It's why urban ecosystems (including VC-istan, which is not a city per se) turn into hellholes shortly after their peak of greatness. Many of the world's top cities are expensive as all hell,…

Expensive real estate is a symptom of one of two things:

1. A rapid upward change in desirability or job market health. In the long run, this will even out as housing is built-- it's just slower to build new houses than create new jobs or reasons for people to live somewhere. If it's demand-based, expensive housing doesn't mean that it's a good place to live; only that it became a better place to live faster than builders could react.

2. Pathology, including NIMBYism (Silicon Valley, the Village) and outright crime (New York's rent-control scams) or problems with the transportation system (again: Silicon Valley).

The dumbshits who cheer on high real estate prices think it's a demand improvement, when it's almost always (over 95%) a supply problem, that causes real estate to go up.

The most expensive city in the country is Luanda. Next is Moscow. Neither is known for a robust, healthy economy.

People tend to mistake the second for the first and assume that expensive real estate is a sign of something good. It's not, and the long-term effects of expensive real estate are extremely undesirable.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#92

Post by te_chris »

michaelochurch wrote: post #72

Silicon Valley used to be a place with cheap land where people went because the cost of living was low, and they could tinker with cool ideas whereas, in the expensive East Coast cities, they'd have to work themselves to death just to tread water. California was this place where you could come and do cool stuff and build on land the East Coast elite didn't want. It's no longer cheap to live there. Tinkering with new…

This rings true and people always seem to forget that it's much easier to innovate when the cost of living is lower.

I'm currently living in Auckland, New Zealand, which by NZ (and world standards I think, though can't cite anything off hand) is quite expensive, but myself and my girlfriend have been contemplating moving to Sydney, Australia, a city which is one of most expensive in the world but where we would both be paid more. The cost of living there makes it a complete non-starter if you're not just wanting to work full time - and then trying to eek out a pleasurable life at the weekends.

I currently contract 3 days a week to support myself while working on my startup and trying to fit in some time for music as well in the other 4 days (and try to get relaxation each week too). The money I make wouldn't last very long in Sydney or any world city for that matter, I guess that's where the VC is supposed to kick in, but if it doesn't then you're in trouble.

If it's one thing I've worked out recently, full time, 40 hour week style employment is the enemy of me being able to pursue any sort of interesting side project, I'm sure it's similar for others. It's a realisation that, now I've had it, I can't imagine ever working under those conditions on anything but my own projects. High costs of living such as those in SF and Sydney (and even Auckland) can necessitate such income just to live with a modicum of dignity however, and then trap you with dining out at weekends and such, resulting in not actually achieving any progress on the projects that matter most to you. Worst of all this is the debilitating feeling that socialising and being a functional human being is preventing you from achieving your goal.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#94

Post by jacoblyles »

If you are considering a new startup idea and you think "that sounds easy, I can build it in a month", then you are most likely entering a crowded market where your startup will not add much marginal value to the world. This is most consumer startups.

If instead, your idea makes you say "That sounds hard. I'm going to have to overcome technical challenges/ accumulate domain expertise/ leap regulatory hurdles" then you are most likely breaking new ground, adding significant value to society, and creating something hard to copy.

As much as I am happy for the success of the snapchats of the world (and the army of snapchat clones), I don't think the world would miss them very much if they were gone.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#95

Post by ghaff »

I'd encourage anyone interested in this topic to also check out the cover story from Technology Review a few months back: "Why we can't solve big problems." http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/429690/why-we-...

It touches on issues with the VC investment model but brings in a lot more as well.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#96

Post by RougeFemme »

I think another relatively recent development - last 20 years or so - hindering innovation is the proliferation of "Wall street analysts" and their quarterly projections which focus comapnies on the very short-term. . .at least publicly-traded companies. They can do well, but if they don't do as well as "the analysts" projected then they are deemed failures who must do some soul-searching, cost-cutting, etc.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#97

Post by eli_gottlieb »

DaniFong wrote: post #82

For what it's worth, in my experience the people talking about big innovation, actually ARE extremely supportive of genuine, plausible efforts at producing planetary scale improvements. In our case, we're trying to solve the economical energy storage problem (lightsail.com) These folks put their money where their mouth is, and helped out greatly when we needed advice or funding or connections. Particular people who h…

Ok, so here's a fun question: where do I find a list of the Big Problems? Because when I look at the world, it seems to me as if most of the really Big Problems are not technological but social. In the end, the conversion to solar energy won't be a single man's heroic effort, it'll be the combined efforts of an entire society that finally decided to go solar.

On the other hand, technological approaches to social problems seem like an excellent idea to me.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#98

Post by jjsz »

eldavido wrote: post #84
jjsz wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I think you shouldn't come up in here telling people that cashing out at 25 doesn't make a 'real' difference. There are people who prefer life experience, over work and research experience. There are people who rather invest in other people taking that risk, than taking the risk themselves. Everybody's different. The millionaires are the ones paying for your research work. So when someone like you spends 30 y…

I think you're talking about Brave New World by Huxley?

Yes, that book! Thank you!

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#99

Post by jusben1369 »

pg wrote: post #87

These articles are easy to write (and upvote) but such conclusions are pretty meaningless till you have a definition of what counts as innovation. That's a very interesting question, and yet just about everyone who talks about this topic ducks it and goes instead for the easy score. Maybe we can do better here on HN. What's the right way to measure innovation? E.g. surely the 5 year old's definition (big shiny things…

It's true. But also somewhat reminiscent of the "What is a startup?" discussion a few months back which was inconclusive. It seems "everyone knows what it is but no one can explain it" But to take a stab at it I'd say the level of innovation is directly tied to the amount of economic improvement and/or life improvement that results. Internet = huge change in economic efficiencies and life improvement. ("Life improvement" would have to be related to time free'ed up to spend on other goals) Mobile the same.

Re: The hypocrisy in Silicon Valley's big talk on innovation

#100

Post by jamesaguilar »

pg wrote: post #87

These articles are easy to write (and upvote) but such conclusions are pretty meaningless till you have a definition of what counts as innovation. That's a very interesting question, and yet just about everyone who talks about this topic ducks it and goes instead for the easy score. Maybe we can do better here on HN. What's the right way to measure innovation? E.g. surely the 5 year old's definition (big shiny things…

I would say that delta on how people live their daily lives (maybe in time-affected or some other similar metric) is probably close.
Post reply on HN