Thoughts on Silicon Valley and the Rest of the World

Joaquin Miller – Life Amongst The Modocs, 1874:

As lone as God and white as a winter moon, Mount Shasta starts up suddenly from the heart of the great black forests of California.

You would hardly call Mount Shasta a part of the Sierras; you would say rather that it is the great white tower of some ancient and eternal wall, with here and there the white walls overthrown.

It has no rival! There is not even a snow crowned subject in sight of its dominion. A shining pyramid in everlasting mail of frosts and ice, the sailor sometimes, in a day of singular clearness, catches glimpses of it from the sea a hundred miles away to the west; and it may be seen from the dome of the capitol 340 miles distant. The immigrant coming from the east beholds the snowy, solitary pillar from afar out on the arid sage-brush plains, and lifts his hands in silence as if in answer to a sign.

Stewart Brand has a very bold article appropriately titled How slums can save the planet about the benefits (while admitting some of the real problems) of highly compacted urban environments. One paragraph about urban farming really struck me and I’m very curious to hear whether it’s actually accurate and sustainable. If so it makes for some very interesting possibilities:

One idea that could be transferred from squatter cities is urban farming. An article by Gretchen Vogel in Science in 2008 enthused: “In a high-tech answer to the ‘local food’ movement, some experts want to transport the whole farm shoots, roots, and all to the city. They predict that future cities could grow most of their food inside city limits, in ultraefficient greenhouses… A farm on one city block could feed 50,000 people with vegetables, fruit, eggs, and meat. Upper floors would grow hydroponic crops; lower floors would house chickens and fish that consume plant waste.”

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita – The Predictionieer’s Game:

Conversely, the notion that the developments that make up history are primarily a series of chance events seems equally odd to me. Why fight over ideas, select governments, build armies, fund research, promote literacy, create art, or write histories if all we are doing is twiddling our thumbs while chance developments sund us bouncing around like the physicist’s particles? How can anyone deny strategic behavior and its consequences when we are surrounded by it in almost everything we do?

To be sure, the world as we know it could have swung one way or the other. That’s why neither the past nor the future follows an inevitable path. There are always chance elemnts behind which ways things, but those cahnce events rarely decide the future.

Bo Parfet – Die Trying:

The vast majority of people have goals. They want to work out; they’d like to eat healthier food; they have their eye on a new job; they want to start their own company; they’re trying to become better parents. They want to change and they want to improve. Yet, while they talk about this, within themselves they usually remain the same, year after year. So how do you change? One way is to make minor adjustments over the course of a lifetime. Another is the transition that occurs in response to the death or near death of a loved one. And then there are those individuals such as myself who want to change dramatically and relatively quickly. Born with limited ability, we achieve this by saying that we’re sick and tired of living a regular existence, and we stop outside the ordinary by knowingly putting ourselves in life-threatening situations, facing adversity like we’ve never done before.

Steve Blank – Defining the Scalable Startup:

A “scalable startup” takes an innovative idea and searches for a scalable and repeatable business model that will turn it into a high growth, profitable company. Not just big but huge. It does that by entering a large market and taking share away from incumbents or by creating a new market and growing it rapidly.

Marc Andreessen:
I grew up in rural Wisconsin, okay? No access to information relating to rest of the world except for whatever was in the public library, right, for which I could probably thank Andrew Carnegie or somebody like that way back when.

Charlie Rose:
Right.

Marc Andreessen:
But like no connection to current events, no connection to the idea that you can start your own business. No connection to new technology. No connection to anything. I mean, you know. So you take every kid living in a rural community in the US, you take every kid living in the inner city, you take every kid growing up in the developing world, and you give them access to the world, they will be so much better educated. They’ll be so much more aware.

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita – The Predictionieer’s Game:

Diplomats are convinced that a country’s name is an important variable that helps explain behavior. That’s why the State Department continues to be organized around country desks, just as the intelligence community is organized around geographic regions. Leaders of multinational corporations take much the same view. When they have a problem in Kazakhstan, they call their guys in Kazakhstan to find out what to do. That seems eminently reasonable. Yet it is terribly inadequate for solving most problems.

Certainly knowing about places and how different they might be is important, but not as important as knowing about people and how similar they are, wherever they are. I have not arrived at this view lightly nor, I hope, in ignorance. After all, the training that led to my Ph.D. molded me into a South Asia specialist. I even studied Urdu for five years and did field research in India, so I certainly respect and value area expertise. But area studies alone are a poor substitute for the marriage of knowledge about places and the deep understanding of applied game theorists about how people decide. Surely we would think it ridiculous if chemists believed that oxygen and hydrogen combine differently in China than they do in the United States, but for some reason we think it entirely sensible to believe that people make choices based on different principles in Timbuktu than in Tipperary.

I loved this quote from a post on photography in third world countries:

The goal is to not draw attention to yourself. Think like a photojournalist. Unwanted attention prevents good photo opportunities(and can be annoying). On short trips, it can be tough to become an instant local. Beyond the obvious like your choice of clothing , subconscious behavioural clues beyond your control will give you away. It’s a matter of convincing yourself that you belong. If you can visualize yourself as belonging there, you’ll spend less time worrying about how you don’t fit in. You’ll notice more around you, and others will notice you less. This leads to great photo opportunities. Do all you can to minimize the attention you draw. Walk like a local. Try to talk like a local. Dress like a local. Be a local. It is at least partially a state of mind.

I couldn’t agree more, not just as a photographer but also as a traveller – one of the big downsides of traveling too quickly is that you never get the feel for a country – try to take the time to let the place sink in.

One of my favorite photos I took in India.

I’m currently reading the excellent Killing Rage by Eamon Collins based on a recommendation from Chris Blattman’s blog. Having became interested in Politics and the wider world around the time of the Good Friday Agreement, being a big fan of Irish literature and culture, and having stayed close to the Irish border during marching season I have always been very interested in the conflict, its origins, and possible solutions. Collins is a former IRA Intelligence agent turned informer and was murdered after the book was published. While Blattman was particularly struck by the insight of why young people turn to violence I am more struck by reading of the banality and acceptance of violence in places I have since visited and fallen in love with. One frequent locale is Rostrevor, a small village by Carlingford Lough (the border runs through the lake) where I stayed for a week taking a language course, one of the most peaceful places I have ever seen which was previously the scene of much smuggling in violence. The bank where my host father worked had been bombed several times and he had been held up during a bank robbery and everyone talked about these events with an acceptance and calm that was difficult to fathom. The contrast between the serene hill paths and parks and music and laughter and the darker sides of all of it is difficult to accept.

Anyone who knows me will also know that I love the Economist and listen to its Audio Edition on my way to work every week as my general news overview. The beginning of its special report on the economic downtown a few weeks ago is a perfect example of its combination of high (though not always perfect) quality reporting and biting wit:

Five years ago Michael Silverstein and Neil Fiske wrote a book, “Trading Up: The New American Luxury”. They argued that Americans, even those of modest means, were abandoning merely adequate products for luxurious ones. Jake the construction worker, for example, splurged $3,000 on Callaway golf clubs, though he could have bought a set nearly as good for a third as much. (“They make me feel rich,” he said.) A shipping clerk on $25,000 a year bought silk pyjamas from Victoria’s Secret. A couple making $125,000 ordered a $4,000 brand-name cooking range, even though their kitchen came with a free generic one.

If you read the book backwards, it describes what is going on today.

- Trading down: From decadence to discounts, The Economist, May 30th, 2009