RSS Feed
  1. Asking the Right Questions

    July 30, 2011 by Matt Mireles


    I came home from work grinning with pride.

    Fridays are now “Code Review” days at SpeakerText. Each Code Review, a different engineer shares a completed project with the company. Discussion ensues. This has turned into an opportunity for everyone in the company––interns included––to bring up issues and question how & why we do what we do.

    Matt Swanson, my co-founder, CTO, roommate and best friend, is responsible for setting up this tradition. Yesterday was the first time I attended. It was awesome.

    The session started at 530p with a presentation from our senior Ruby developer. It ended almost 3 hours later. In between, we had an epic, wide ranging all-hands discussion about our worker community, the morality of crowdsourcing, incentive structures, what actually drives human behavior and whether “rationality” is a legitimate concept.

    What sparked the debate was a presentation from an economist. Yes, an economist––a labor economist, to be precise. We hired him to lead research into our worker community. Who are they? Why are they working? How do we incent them to do more/better work?

    It turns out that our best workers didn’t fit the profile that we’d hypothesized. This was interesting. But what really got people excited (good & bad) were the economist’s suggestions on how we should incentivize our workers going forward. I won’t share the exact details (for competitive reasons), but it forced us to ask an important philosophical question: What does it mean to be “rational”? Is someone rational if they exchange material benefit for psychic pleasure? Or is the very notion of rationality completely bunk, just some theorist’s antiquated idea of how humans should act that has no bearing on real behavior?

    Moreover, What moral duty do we have as a company to discourage or induce certain patterns of behavior? Do people really have choice and control over their actions? Is turning work into a game evil?

    There was non consensus answer. People disagreed, sometimes sharply. Even the interns got involved. It was an outstanding debate––the kind you have with your roommates in college at 2am over Nietzche or Marx. Except we weren’t in college. We were a room of 10 (mostly) grown men. And we weren’t just talking theory––we were debating the future of our company and what we are going to build in the coming weeks.

    Most companies never ask these basic questions of themselves. My hope is that we never stop.

    Team SpeakerText at Friday Code Review


  2. The “Outsider” Strategy

    July 18, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    In college, I studied spent a lot of time studying warfighting strategies in the context of international security and politics. My pet topic was insurgent strategies––the strategies of the weak and poorly resourced. Amazing how many of those lessons transfer to technology startups in the broader Silicon Valley…

    I had coffee this morning with an aspiring entrepreneur. He was young, still in college and interning at a pre-IPO “startup” in San Francisco. Toward the end of the meeting, he asked me a question that I think a lot of proto-entrepreneurs ask themselves (I know I did!):

    It seems like every startup you read about on TechCrunch was started by ex-Googlers or Stanford kids. That’s not me. I don’t have that kind of pedigree. Should I try to work at Google and get that pedigree before I start a company? Will investors fund me if I didn’t go to Stanford or work at Google?

    Translation: How the hell can I make in Silicon Valley if I’m not already in “the club”?

    Many, many entrepreneurs––myself included––have struggled with this question. If you struggle with this quandary, here’s my advice…

    Most people are outsiders. And even the people who are insiders now, by and large, were outsiders once, trying like fuck to break in––just like you are now. This is very normal.

    Force the world to pay attention to you. There’s a few options for how to do this:

    #1 Build something people want.

    If you can do this, it is the most preferable option. If you build the next Facebook, people will throw money at you, period. Peter Thiel invested in Facebook because Facebook was awesome, not because Mark Zuckerberg had gone to Harvard. This is a case of “traction trumps everything.”

    The reality of most startups, however, is that very often you need to outside resources (i.e. venture capital) to get to the point where you’ve built something that lots of people want (i.e. there’s a big market for your product). Nonetheless, you typically need to build something that at least a few people want to get funded.

    #2 Make a name for yourself on Hacker News.

    Get yourself on the front page of Hacker News! The top eyeballs in Silicon Valley visit the site daily. It is THE locus of the global startup community.

    Your best bet here is to take a sacred cow and skewer it. Be a contrarian and mean it! Nothing pleases the entrepreneur soul like seeing a scrappy little David take on Goliath. The important thing here is to be thoughtful and intelligent, not simply provocative for the sake of being provocative. The key here is to earn the respect and attention of your readers. This was a large part of my strategy, but the guy who really nailed this is GroupMe’s VP of BD, Steve Cheney.

    #3 Get Press.

    Do something so outrageous that TechCrunch has to notice you. Back in Summer 2010, when SpeakerText’s finances were on, ehh, shaky ground and it was questionable whether we’d raise any money at all, there was plan C: “Startup Tent.”

    The idea was simple: Pitch a tent on the Stanford campus, tweet like crazy & check in on Foursquare, livestream a video feed, and pray that Michael Arrington showed up before the cops. “Oh, those scrappy entrepreneurs!” would be the headline…and then angel investment would follow…? This was the #StartupTent strategy.

    AirBnB used this strategy early on with their Obama O’s & McCain Crunch cereal box campaign. Landed them on CNN, then YC.

    ***

    At the end of the day, breaking in is just the first step. Financial success is ultimately what matter:


    Each time you crest the rise in front of you, it just makes it clear the size of the even larger hill that looms beyond it. It goes on for a long time. I pissed blood for years keeping Netflix alive while we figured that shit out – as did every other successful entrepreneur in the valley.

    Ultimately, your reputation in the tech community is going to hinge on your ability to deliver this company to success. That’s the real – and only – responsibility of a CEO. Marketing yourselves well in the valley is just one of the many many things you have to get right to make that success happen.
    -Marc Randolph, February 28, 2011 (in an email to me)


  3. Mémoires of My Early Twenties

    May 29, 2011 by Matt Mireles


    I ran across Chateaupia this week. It’s a documentary about Le Chateau, a place I lived as a UC Berkeley student in 2001-2002. It was shot during the time I lived there. I dropped out of Berkeley for the second and final time in May 2002.

    As the video suggestes, Chateau was a madhouse.

    First they flung chunks of a cooked pig at passing cars. Then another resident of the student housing co-op beheaded a chicken with garden shears, said shocked neighbors.

    Le Chateau is Berkeley’s own Animal House, its neighbors say, and they want a court to force the landlord to pay them damages for their years of suffering through raucous naked pool parties, nighttime bongo drumming and piles of rat-friendly garbage.

    Truth is, Chateau was a madhouse. Gutterpunks hung out on the porch at all hours, doing whippits (aka Nitrus Oxide) and smoking weed.

    When you heard about something really bad happening at Chateau, it was usually a result of the gutterpunks. Gutterpunks were crashers––they didn’t live at Chateau, they weren’t technically part of the house although they typically had friends who were. But their presence was felt far and wide, nonetheless.

    For example, the guy in the film who lights his nipple on fire and punches himself in the head repeatedly is a gutterpunk, not an actual Chateauvian. If I remember correctly, he also had 5150 tatoo’d in big letters on the back of his head. Nice kid at heart, just had lots of problems.

    The scariest gutterpunk episode was when someone jumped off the 4th floor roof into the shallow end of the pool. At 3 feet deep, I thought for sure the guy was gonna die. It was so scary. But somehow, he lived, popping out of the water with a scream: “Oh my god, I can’t fucking believe I’m still alive!!! That was awesome!”

    Which isn’t to say that the real Chateauvians were angels. My roommate, for instance, caused a stir when he cut down someone else’s San Pedro cactus and boiled it to make mescaline for a weekend camping trip with a girlfriend. The problem wasn’t that he used it to make mescaline; the problem was that he had prevented someone else from using to make mescaline. A Molecular & Cell Biology major, he financed much of his education by distributing Psilocybin Mushroom to the East Bay.

    Once a month, I would arrive home to a massive pile of shrooms on the coffee table. He would divide them up into freezer bags and sell them off, making (I assumed) several thousand dollars of profit in less than 24 hours.

    Personally, I was afraid that he (and me as his roommate) would end up getting robbed at gunpoint. Fortunately, this never came to pass.

    Truth is, the drugs never had much appeal to me. I wanted adventure; I wanted excitement. The madness of Chateau initially seemed like it had both. And for a while, it did. But then the novelty wore off. There’s a great line from the film, at 17m47s:

    I thought it was going to be a socio-political experiment inside these walls. But it’s just a bunch of people with cheap rooms trying to move somewhere else when they can.

    People moved out because it was the extreme. Newcomers would arrive and some subset would do a bunch of drugs and spin out of control. Three weeks after I moved in, a guy lost his mind and jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge. He was one of two suicides that year.

    Chateau was really, really bad for people with underlying mental illness (most mental illnesses rear their head in your 20′s). Their illness would be exposed and offered an assortment of uppers, downers and hallucinogens; the chance to run free, no limits. People lost it. It was bad.

    But that was just the dark side, which for a time felt like a minority of what was going on in the house: Staying up until 5am every morning; painting murals on the walls whenever you wanted; naked pool parties; strangers doing LSD in the living room; for better and worse, it was the centennial Garden of Earthly Delights.

    The Garden of Earthly Delights, by Hironomous Bosch

    In the end, however, I grew cynical of the whole thing: A dear friend of mine succumbed to the drug culture and turned into a meth addict. I was heartbroken for a long time over that one.

    At age 20, I had already done too much and seen to much to be overly enamored with the drug culture. Drugs had already been a part of my high school experience: my best friend had gotten busted for smoking pot and doing acid, both of which were revealed when he crashed his car while studying for the SAT. The cause? Acid flashback triggered by marijuana use. (He scored a 1520/1600 the next day, fyi.) This was the kind of kid I hung out with in high school.

    For me, Chateau was like working as an EMT in South LA or fighting forest fires in Montana––another adventure, another episode in my life; I was never an insider, never a drinker of the Chateau kool aid.

    All in all, the Chateau adventure was a good one. And this film a good reminder of where I was a decade ago, before I had learned about the elite class and power at Columbia, before I had turned into a jaded street medic in the Bronx, before––hell, long before––I had ever thought of becoming an entrepreneur.

    Oh, what a long strange trip it’s been. I’m just grateful that it’s taken me here.


  4. Technology Hucksters

    May 4, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    “I had a false idea about what Silicon Valley was. The myth of Silicon Valley is about technical competence, but the reality is that marketing still makes a huge difference… all these guys are hucksters who really crossed the line to brilliance.”
    -Julia Angwin, NPR

    ***


    About two weeks ago, I debated this point with Marc Randolph.

    Marc, you see, is the original founder of Netflix. Reed Hastings, who gets all the credit nowadays, was actually Netflix’s seed investor prior to taking over as CEO. Marc retired in 2004 and now, after a few years of chillaxing, has dipped his toes back into the game and taken to mentoring entrepreneurs like me and the guys.

    Side Note: Don’t let anyone ever tell ya that messaging someone cold on FB won’t get you anywhere.

    Now, although I never saw him in his prime, I can guarantee you that Marc Randolph is a world class bullshitter. To be an entrepreneur, especially a non-technical one in a highly technical field, you gotta be.

    Maybe not every company or every person, but for most people in most situations, it’s my firm belief that you gotta fake it before you make it. Sell the sizzle first, create the steak later.

    And yet, from one bullshitter to another, Marc bemoaned this sorry state of affairs. “Back in my day, it was all about the product, all about who could create the best algorithm and the best code––not about the marketing or this brand bullshit.”

    It’s a sad day when people like you and me take over Silicon Valley,” he sighed.

    Side Note: I have not yet taken over Silicon Valley.

    This is a common refrain.

    Especially in retrospect, people want to believe that the world is a rational place where the best people, the best products, the best technology wins. But that’s simply untrue.

    I called bullshit on the bullshitter.

    The truth is that it’s really hard for any one person, any one user, any one buyer to know what product, what service, what technology is really “the best.” The information problem is huge and only growing.

    Sometimes, and this is usually rare, the answer is obvious, as it was when Google first showed up in 1999. The product was free and practically sold itself. But those instances are an anomaly.

    Engineers hate this idea, it goes against everything they’ve been trained to believe about the world, about how the merit system works––but people want to be sold. They crave a story, they crave simplicity, a narrative that they already understand, a framework they can use to understand these new, strange things we call technology.

    And that’s the thing about technology: it is, by definition, new. New is hard to grasp, hard to understand. Why would I want this thing, this new gizmo, this new website that I’ve never seen before?

    For some, the answer is obvious––but this group is small. They are the innovators, the early adopters, the near side of the chasm.

    Most people aren’t engineers, they don’t have precise goals, they don’t know what it is they want per se, they don’t remember what it is you said two hours ago––the only thing they remember at the end of a long day is how you made them feel.

    Knowledge transfer between humans is a fundamentally inefficient process. Its difficulty is an immutable part of life. In business, especially in the business of creating the new, advantage goes to those who can explain the new and make it seem not just memorable but desirable.

    And that is where people like me and Marc and all the other hucksters-made-good who distorted reality first so that they could then create something of value later fit into this Silicon Valley world of scientific genius and technical innovation.

    Though we create machines, we sell to humans.


  5. Chip On My Shoulder

    April 27, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    UPDATE: Investors are still giving me shit for this and it’s pissing me off. Look people, I asked a legit question publicly that A LOT of other people, primarily ENTREPRENEURS, have asked privately––including CEOs of companies that Dave Tisch has invested in (they’ve emailed me). It’s a real issue.

    Yes, I am the asshole who asked the question, but I’m just the messenger. Really, this is TechStars bad for not having thought: “Hmm, broke ass entrepreneurs might wonder why a trust fund baby who’s never started a company is running TechStars:NYC? We should probably address this question on our website and in the press before entrepreneurs start wondering or whispering to each other.”

    ***

    This album is dedicated to all the teachers that told me
    I’d never amount to nothin’, to all the people that lived above the
    buildings that I was hustlin’ in front of that called the police on
    me when I was just tryin’ to make some money to feed my daughters.

    -Biggie Smalls, Juicy

    Last week, I ignited a minor shitstorm on the Internet with a tweet about Dave Tisch, the Director of TechStars NYC.

    I mean, I meant to be provocative, but sheesh:


    In my mind, I was asking a pretty straightforward, obvious question: How the hell does a trust funder from the Tisch family end up running an elite technology incubator in my old hood…without ever having started or sold a company???

    Something smelled fishy…very East Coast, old money cabal.

    It should surprise no one, but I have a thing against old money. I dislike unearned wealth–it undermines the meritocracy and the American dream. If I am lucky enough to create wealth for myself, I will not pass it on to my children–if they are to have any, they must make their own.

    For some context, I went to Columbia, where there was plenty of old money floating around. While all the rich kids partied on the weekends and interned for their dad’s friends in Midtown, I worked on an ambulance in the South Bronx, picking up drunks and doing CPR on junkies.

    I did that job 24-50 hours a week. While the money allowed me to attend Columbia, the time suck prevented me from getting internships, building my resume and doing the things everyone else was doing to make themselves hirable post-college. I envied the trust funders and their endless opportunities.

    Hence the chip on my shoulder.

    But back to the previously scheduled blog post…

    On Friday, I spent an hour on Skype with one of our investors from New York. He brought up the Tisch kerfluffle.

    Me: “Jesus, it’s like I kicked a puppy! Everyone and their sister has a hard on for this guy. Holy cow!”

    Investor: “Yeah dude, I was a little suspicious of him at first too. But Dave’s a really good guy. And the TechStars NYC Demo Day was the best Demo Day I’ve ever seen anywhere.”

    Me: “So everyone says…”

    Investor: “Well, the inside scoop is that yeah, he comes from money, but he wants to prove that he’s his own man, that he’s not just some trust fund kid with a last name. He’s got a chip on his shoulder.”

    A chip on his shoulder…now that is something I can relate to.

    Truth is, that’s my tribe: the strivers, the unsettled ones––the men and women with something to prove.

    The thing I like about that explanation is that it speaks to my heart more than all the tweets about the slickness of TechStars Demo Day or that, really, Dave’s a nice guy. It tells me that he has a reason to fuck with the status quo, to create and to destroy, to be more than just a crony… that he has a reason to be an entrepreneur.

    And that, my friends, is what this country, what America is all about.

    Kudos, Dave!

    Like this post? Vote for it on Hacker News.


  6. Finding a Technical Co-Founder

    April 6, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    http://whartoniteseekscodemonkey.tumblr.com/ <---this is how the engineering community sees you.

    A few high-level points to keep in mind….

    #1 Everyone is looking for a technical co-founder/CTO these days
    #2 Most people don’t find a CTO, thus cannot build anything and thus #FAIL
    #3 How the hell are you any different than the rest of the non-technical people out there?
    #4 Do you have the faintest clue about how software engineering actually works?
    #5 How are you not a douchebag?

    Look, early on, I made every mistake in the book––spamming grad students, pitching to investors with no product and no team, partnering with the wrong people, etc.––so don’t sweat it if you fuck up and/or are a complete noob. It ain’t easy. Just be humble, read as much as you can, talk to as many people as you can, hustle and learn.

    Like this post? Vote it up on Hacker News.


  7. Coming of Age as an Entrepreneur

    February 25, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    Well it was just a dream
    Just a moment ago

    I think back to the Winter of 2008-2009. SpeakerText was a few months old. I was still living in New York. The city was cold at night. It snowed like 2 feet in one day.

    Back then, for all intents and purposes, SpeakerText was just me, just my dream. We had no hustler on staff. No hacker. No money.

    I remember one night in particular. I had left a small meetup organized by what was then called the Blue Venture Community (aka BVC), Columbia’s entrepreneur group. Goddamn it was cold. I was cranking Biggie on the iPod, walking down 53rd St in midtown, huddling in my wool coat. The Bloomberg sign hung in the air above. One day, I told myself, there’d be a SpeakerText sign. One day.

    Well, we ain’t there yet.

    But we’ve come a long way. On February 1, 2011, we got our first office (see photo above). And then, about two weeks ago, I found myself at The Rosewood, a posh restaurant on Sand Hill Road. Swanson and I were there meeting Mikael Berner, one of SpeakerText’s investors. It was a strange, fantastic feeling. I wasn’t there to beg for money; I wasn’t there as “the help,” picking someone up in the ambulance; I was there as a CEO meeting an investor––not a prospect, but an honest-to-god man that had written us a check.

    For the first time in my life as an entrepreneur, I felt like I’d arrived, like I was equal and not just another outsider trying like fuck to break in. It felt awesome.

    ***

    Over Christmas, I shaved my mohawk. It started off as an accident. Normally, I would cut the sides myself, then let Swanson clean up the edges. But it was December 23rd and he had already left to see family. I was about to turn 30 and fly down to LA. Over Christmas, I was expecting to see a woman that, well… let’s just say I wanted to look good for her. I wanted to cut the edges as close as possible, and ended up creating a bald spot in the back o’ the hawk. This led to me shaving my head entirely.

    I ended up letting my hair grow out. I even got it cut at an actual barber.

    As it turns out, I’m not an outsider anymore.

    Vote for this post on Hacker News and follow me on Twitter.


  8. Why I Love Hip Hop, America

    February 17, 2011 by Matt Mireles


    I grew up in Orange County. I was corn fed on punk rock. When I was 17, I saw Rage Against the Machine at Irvine Meadows. The mosh pit was gigantic. Actually, it started off as two pits. They ultimately merged. There was a fire in the center. I ran against the grain. It was awesome. Just. Fucking. Awesome.

    Thirteen years later, I still relish that night.

    But there’s something about hip hop that I enjoy. Something distinctly American. Something I fucking love: the songs all tell a Horatio Alger story of rags to riches, of hustle, of “you can’t put me down.” As an entrepreneur, it tells my story.

    Sometimes, when I’m running down Market Street in SF, I blast the music, think about it all, and shed a tear.

    It just feels right.

    I love this life.


  9. AngelList: The Best Thing for Startups Since…the Internet

    February 15, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    AngelList is essentially a public market for private, early-stage tech stocks––without actually being a transaction processor. It is the single most important innovation in venture capital in the last 5 years.

    My startup, SpeakerText, raised $600k and 90% of our investors came through AngelList, including our lead investor, the Silicon Valley legend Mitch Kapor.

    Imagine if Evan Williams (founder of Twitter) designed a NASDAQ competitor just for web startups, minus any govt regulation. What would it do? How would it work?

    -Lots of Investors: AngelList has something close to 700 1,200 angel investors signed up so far. These are not random people. Literally, it’s all the top people you’ve heard of, plus a ton you haven’t. But most of them are really, really good.

    -Structured Pitches: AngelList pitches are not a free-for-all. The submission format forces entrepreneurs to get to the point and allows for only a short list of fields: Product, Traction, Team, and Social Proof.

    -Frictionless Intros: Investors who see a startup’s pitch can get intro’d to the startup with a single click. Investors can also “vote” for startups they like (typically after they’ve heard the pitch in person), and declare if/when they’ve actually invested. (Yes, it really is that baller.)

    -Social Dealflow: Investors are encouraged to connect with and follow each other, a la Twitter. Each time an investor asks for an intro, votes or invests in a startup, it goes into the activity stream of that investor and everyone who follows him/her. This makes it easy for investments to “go viral.”

    -Limited Curation: Babak Nivi, Naval Ravikant and Brendan Baker actually pick out what they think are the best startups and blast them out to investors via email. This is hugely effective, and great for the startups that make it into their email blasts.

    Honestly, in my view, AngelList is the best thing to happen to startups since…the internet. The guys who run it are awesome, accesible and no-bullshit. The community is excellent. The money is real.

    With all that said, I have one feature request:

    -Investor Rating System: Not all investors are the same. TheFunded tried to do this in a half-ass sort of way, but given AngelList’s transparency, I think it’s the perfect venue for entrepreneurs to rate investors and offer feedback. Markets work best, after all, when everyone is operating with “the shadow of the future” in their mind


  10. Guns, Government & the Fallacy of Cyber-Utopianism

    January 30, 2011 by Matt Mireles

    TLDR version: The idea that technology by itself can change the world is a delusion. For technology to have an impact in the world, humans must wield it, sometimes in conjunction with lethal force (or the threat thereof).*

    Ten days ago, as we were checking out office space on Market Street, I met a woman at a coffee shop. Her office was in the building next door to the space we were checking out. She was educated, blonde and pretty. I asked about the neighborhood. We bantered.

    To my co-founders’ annoyance, I stayed, picking her brain for a little. Turns out, the woman works for a mayoral candidate. Here’s what I learned from her:

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger is no longer the governor of California
    -Jerry Brown is the governor
    -Gavin Newsom is no longer the mayor of San Francisco
    -Gavin Newson is now California’s Lieutenant Governor
    -Someone else is the mayor of SF

    Maybe it sounds crazy, but this was all news to me. I literally had no idea. The more we talked, the more I looked like an idiot. Blondie was not impressed, “Are you serious? You don’t even know who the governor is?” Crash and burn.

    This anecdote, however, illustrates a larger point: I live in a bubble.

    Two years ago, I was a fresh grad out of the Columbia political science department, one of if not the top poli sci programs in the world. Although my focus was on international security, I was a political junkie. I knew who the important governors were. I knew who the up and coming congressmen were. I knew about instability in Central Asia and Russia’s imperial ambitions in the Caucasus.

    Two years and a startup later, I don’t even know who’s the governor of my own state. Where I used to visit NYTimes.com thrice a day, I now visit once every 10.

    Two weeks ago, Chris Dixon wrote a blog post entitled, “Predicting the Future of the Internet.”

    Predicting the future of the Internet is easy: anything it hasn’t yet dramatically transformed, it will. People, companies, investors and even countries can’t stop this transformation.

    I left a warning in the comments: “Government CAN stop the internet and the information revolution… Progress and rapid technological innovation is not an inevitability––it’s pre-conditioned on a certain set of political circumstances that are frail and fleeting at best.”

    I don’t think many people in the tech world ever seriously considered this idea until this past week, when Egypt turned off the internet.

    And really, it’s not an argument that you hear too often. Everywhere, you hear the techno-optimists and cyber-utopians discussing how technology changes everything, how Twitter & FB can cause revolutions. And you see it too: Corporate empires get crushed, new ones arise in their place; protests happen on the street, governments fall after the masses are mobilized on Facebook.

    Who in this world of entrepreneurs, venture capitalists and their hangers-on is going to argue that what we do is not the most important thing on earth, that we are not in fact the center of the universe? I mean, if I’m at all a representative sample, it’s not like we’re even talking to the politicos or, for that matter, anyone outside our own insular little world who might have a different view.

    Our great creation, the internet––this vast network and everything built on top of it––was supposed to free our minds, to expose us to vast and new ways of thinking. But the reality, at least for me, has been different.

    The internet hasn’t really expanded my field of vision, it’s deepened it.

    In 2008, I was wannabe journalist with a dream about technology and a chip on my shoulder. I didn’t know anything about entrepreneurship or startups or venture capital.

    Two years later, I’m the CEO of a funded company in Silicon Valley. How? I taught myself on the internet. I’ve read blogs voraciously. I’ve turned FB messages into meetings, Tweets into investments. I am deep, deep into this world of startups. The amount of information I can consume is enormous. So enormous, in fact, that I can now consume a diet composed almost entirely of niche-specific information and still be missing out on something important in the industry.

    In the short term, this is great: I now know a ton about what’s going on in my part of the world. Perhaps more so than anyone ever could before.

    The long term is where the echo chamber bites you in the ass: Inevitably, something important happens outside of your niche that has the power to change it completely. Maybe it’s an energy crisis that drives up the cost of shipping and thus clobbers eCommerce. Maybe it’s the government shutting off the internet.

    My point here is that while it’s easy––and in fact natural––for us in the tech world to overlook it: Politics really fucking matters. If it so chooses, the state can kill “the cloud” with the flick of a switch. Congress can tax eCommerce into oblivion. The FCC can kill YouTube. The FTC can regulate Facebook.

    We’ve been deluded into thinking that all this innovation is inevitable and unstoppable. It ain’t.

    And beyond that, information sharing is not an end in itself. Governments don’t fall because you tweet @ them. They fall when people with guns organize themselves on Facebook.

    The internet is only a trigger.

    The internet was invented because military generals wanted a resilient command and control system for our nuclear forces. The internet itself is not a weapon; it is not a force upon itself. No, the internet is only an enabler, a lever that, if used properly, can connect and inspire people––real human beings made of flesh and blood––into action.

    Fred Wilson wrote a post this morning entitled, A Frightening Week.

    I suppose I am a “cyberutopian” at heart as Evgeny Morozov calls us. I believe in the power of technology, particularly communications technology powered by the internet, to make the world better, safer, and more open and free.

    This past week has shown that the cyberutopian view is naive and that those who are not interested in a better, safer, more open and free world will use technology to further their interests too.

    So this has been a frightening week and one that shows that the fight for human rights all over the world will not be delivered a decisive win via the internet.

    Fred, I agree. Securing that freedom requires people with guns and training in the art of violence. And that’s a combo you can’t get on the internet. It’s not allowed.

    *What makes the state unique is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force & violence. Even when force is withheld, the threat of it gets people act. Kinda like when a cop tells you to step out of the car.