An Open Challenge to Silicon Valley

http://discussionleader.hbsp.com/haque/2008/04/an_open_challenge_to_silicon_v.html

by bosshog • 18 years ago

35 47 18 years ago

discussionleader.hbsp.com

pg• 18 years ago

Food prices are skyrocketing. The financial system is melting down. Energy, of course, is more and more toxic, and costly.

These are the problems we're being challenged to solve? The first two appear to be random fluctuations-- possibly very bad ones, but due largely to speculation and chance. The third is something investors and founders are working on energetically right now.

ovi256• 18 years ago

The problems are clear though: create something that will make the variations you speak of (whatever their causes) rarer, slower and of lower magnitude. We have done it before (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution) and we will do it time and time again, hopefully. The solutions, as usual, are hard to see. But if we do not work on the big problems, the hard problems, do we do valuable work?

wumi• 18 years ago

"So here's my challenge. If you're a revolutionary, then be one: put your money where your mouth is, and fix a big problem that changes the world for the better - if you really have the courage, the purpose, and the vision, that is."

isn't that essentially saying: "be good"?

bosshog• 18 years ago

He was the original "be good" writer, 2004-2008 B.P (Before Paul)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=site+b...

http://www.bubblegeneration.com/2008/03/edge-principles-frie...

maxwell• 18 years ago

Or, "make something people need."

startingup2• 18 years ago

They are not random fluctuations. Federal Reserve policy had a lot to do with both food prices & the financial system.

Read libertarian economic literature to understand how the US and world economy have been fundamentally warped by the credit bubble unleashed by the Fed - LTCM debacle led to Nasdaq bubble, fighting the Nasdaq bust led to the housing bubble and so on.

Even the start-up flip-it mindset in the valley has roots similar to the housing flip-it mindset everywhere.

Tichy4• 18 years ago

"That is, when they're not too busy partying."

Stopped reading there, that is just stupid. So people are supposed to feel guilty because they party now?

My suggestion: stop breathing, that way you can save Co2 output of your country and aid the developing countries who will be the first victims of the climate change.

Sorry that I can't express my anger in a more sophisticated way. I just think contrasting world problems with party pics is an incredibly cheap shot.

stcredzero6• 18 years ago

What you're objecting to is a straw man. No one is requesting that you should become a monk. But maybe just a little more energy and resources directed towards global problems might be a more balanced position.

There is even money to be earned in doing so. (The Grameen Bank is a good example. So is Dean Kamen's new distiller.)

See Bjorn Lomborg's Ted Talk on cost/benefit in solving global problems!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/62

And lastly, as Abbie Hoffman used to say: if someone ever says something to get your goat, they struck gold!

davidw6• 18 years ago

I read the article, but came away with a sense of "go fix big problems" and very little sense of what sort of thing he thinks people ought to be doing besides

> rebuilding a flawed, false global economy: one which actively transfers wealth from the poor to the rich, from the sick to the healthy, from productivity to cronyism.

which, frankly, sounds like a little bit more than I can handle at the moment. It also sounds "hand wavy" - it would help if he specified some details. In terms of actual poor people... it seems to me that the Chinese, for instance, are actually getting a lot wealthier these days. But that's happening due to their own opening up, and global trade, not because of some entrepreneur in SV.

Tichy4• 18 years ago

Startup People are just people like everybody else, though, somehow trying to get by. It is not like most of them are swimming in money, trying to be successful just for fun. So why should they have a special responsibility?

I am not against solving the worlds problems, but I suspect it makes more sense to focus on the problems you also have a chance of solving.

And I buy into the "to create wealth, create value" mantra (or what is it exactly). Anyway, I think if somebody is successful with their startup, they probably have build something that people want, and hence made the world a better place. Even if it is just a game or some stupid network, I think it is still valid and valuable. If the starving people get their first computer, they'll want to have something to play, too.

If the only goal would be survival for everyone (without any prospects of fun), I would probably look into deep freezing technologies.

Finally, I would like the challenging blogger what he himself is doing about those problems?

menloparkbum3• 18 years ago

He's not that far off the mark. The amount of partying going on in Silicon Valley right now is extreme. There are startup mixer events at least every three days. Last week during "Web 2.0 Expo" there were 2-3 per NIGHT. These aren't wine and cheese and show us your powerpoint type events, either. It is straight up barfing on the sidewalk and the sales team doing coke in the bathroom. The frequency and intensity of these events has been steadily increasing over the past year, in the same manner as they did right before the dot-com bust.

stcredzero6• 18 years ago

A good Ted Talk to look at concerning this is Bjorn Lomborg's talk on cost/benefit and global priorities:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/62

It turns out there's a huge cost/benefit ratio to solving things like access to clean water, malnutrition, and disease. The cost of tackling problems like this is just a fraction of doing things like adopting the Kyoto protocol, and the potential for increasing the economic potential of many countries is very high.

subwindow• 18 years ago

The thing here is that big, immediate and obvious problems are almost never solved in Silicon Valley.

Silicon Valley is good at two things: 1) Solving small problems 2) Solving big, lingering problems that most people don't even realize are problems.

I work for a medical device startup that is hard at work trying to solve big, immediate and obvious problems (heart failure, hypertension) that kill millions of people a year. We're in Atlanta, not SV. Other medical device companies are in Boston, L.A., or even Minneapolis. None of them are in SV. I wonder why.

SV really only does three startup industries well: Software, Computer Hardware, and Green tech. And even the third is pushing it. If you're looking for innovation outside of those three areas, you should look outside of Silicon Valley.

menloparkbum3• 18 years ago

This is a great observation. In regards to point 2, a former coworker put it slightly differently: "I don't think trying to solve a problem is the best way to win big. You want to build something that CREATES problems nobody ever had before."

neilc• 18 years ago

On the contrary, there are quite a few medical device companies in Silicon Valley -- the other day, I was talking to a VC whose sole focus is on investing in medical devices, and he is located in the Valley for a reason. More broadly, there are also a lot of biotech startups in the Valley.

justindz• 18 years ago

If only widgets were edible.

1gor4• 18 years ago

>rebuilding a flawed, false global economy: one which actively transfers wealth from the poor to the rich, from the sick to the healthy

This is self-righteous 'leftist' moralizing of the worst kind.

The global economy is not flawed. It is the way it is. Human interests, interaction, history and habits are stronger than any amateur Marxist can imagine.

You think world is unfair? Probably. However, the pathetic attempts to seek high moral ground are futile. You have seen how One Laptop Per Child faired in real life. You should also remember that there are tons and tons of used computer equipment and especially mobile phones imported into Africa and other poor countries every day. This used equipment is imported for money and put to use immediately. Some of this technology is affecting how farmers in distant African villages are managing their harvest sales, for example.

This is globalisation. It may sound humiliating (used clothes, used phones etc) but it is wonderful, vibrant, living global economic organism which will show some interesting emergent qualities in our lifetime. Who would imagine South East Asia growing the way it does today?

You may see some surprises from Africa too. And no, it would be not because some guilt-ridden guy has shown us, the masses, what to do. Some of the worst damage to third world economies are done by Western donors.

So, basically, my advice to the author: stop preaching the need to change this cruel world and go make something that people want to buy.

startingup2• 18 years ago

I am a libertarian capitalist, and I agree there has been a government-inspired (Fed-inspired, really) transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.

Let's say you are a smart hacker and I offer you this "deal": you put in $15K, I will lend you $150-300K at very low interest rates, which you can invest as you see fit. The gains (minus the low interest paid) are yours, and in the meantime you can also charge me reasonable expenses. If you fail, you get to walk away, with no personal liability. Will you take this deal?

That was the deal private equity, hedge funds got from the Fed & the banks (aided and abetted by the Fed). In good years, they took great money home. In bad times, many of them go bust, with no personal consequence to themselves.

End result: societal transfer of wealth, from the poor/middle-class to the wealthy. This is not a consequence of a free market. The original sin is the easy credit, supplied to the financially well-connected.

aneesh• 18 years ago

Yeah, the investors (hedge funds, pe) don't have to bear the downside of their investment but they get to keep all the upside. Which gives them an incentive to be really risky with their investments.

The Fed has been hesitant to make them face the downside of their decisions, and that needs to slowly change (without causing a panic/crash)

1gor4• 18 years ago

It is funny how now hedge funds and bankers take all the blame, even though millions of 'common people' speculated recklessly in real estate and picked up up enormous debts without any second thought.

The Fed has tried to avoid post-2000 recession and to stimulate general consumption by keeping low interest rates (and not objecting to the tax cuts). This was obviously politically motivated and not very smart as we now see. It did result in a credit bubble. But to claim that it was done to benefit a few 'well-connected' financiers is populism to my opinion. It was done to avoid discontent among people. To appease the masses, so to say...

Interestingly, it is the capitalists who are suffering now, as their equity is eroded by inflation, weak dollar and the bear stock market. The average Joe just defaults on his debts and walks away from his 3 year old house. His creditors take the loss. So it is actually a wealth transfer from the rich to the poor.

rms3• 18 years ago

This is self-righteous libertarian moralizing, though certainly not of the worst kind.

Tichy4• 18 years ago

Now come on, just because some outdated computing hardware is shipped to Africa, everything is peachy?? I agree that "the poor to rich, sick to healthy" is moralist and simplistic, but it doesn't make the opposite true. There are injustices in the world, some of which we probably actively contribute to without being aware of it.

Maybe more transparency would be one thing where web startups could help (ie tracking of goods from production to consumption, giving consumers the choice to consume "fair" goods - and I am aware that "fair" is not always "fair").

Are you sure that the "hardware for Africa" thing is not just a scheme to avoid recycling costs, btw.? (I don't know, just asking).

mjnaus• 18 years ago

People moaning "I am just a tiny hacker" or "You should be directing this at people with money" are either lacking vision or are just not interested in making the world a better place but prefer chasing the mighty dollar. Which in it itself is fine, but then come out and be honest about it.

There are tons of ways even individual hackers can put their skills to use while solving real world problems. No one is expecting you to solve the problems of world hunger or poverty but bitching "I can't" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Have a look at Kiva (kiva.org) for example. They did have a vision and they are doing a pretty damn good job making the world a better place by working on a real-world problem instead of finding a new and "revolutionary" way to figure out what your friends are doing right now.

Gross of the people in the valley are probably to busy liking themselves and praising their good-for-nothing ideas to actually sit down and look at the world in a bit wider perspective.

The world is bigger then the sub-reality that is Silicon Valley.

patrickg-zill• 18 years ago

Are we really "Dancing on the precipice of economic cataclysm" ?

colortone2• 18 years ago

Yes

Read the last 6 mos of Bubblegeneration for more details

jaybe• 18 years ago

well, for a start have a look here:

www.betterplace.org

and if you like it, register and give me your feedback at jbe (at) betterplace.org

An Open Challenge to Silicon Valley

Related Stories