Sam Altman at the Family, Paris [video]
youtube.com
youtube.com
> no matter how much people complain about their jobs, they like having somewhere to go everyday, they like having colleagues, like having a sense of mission in their lives
(As an aside, this statement, oft repeated, always struck me as weird because the one thing I've always not wanted to do was "having somewhere to go everyday".)
But there are a lot of people who don't have a job, have revenue, and seem extremely happy and fulfilled: the retirees. In developed countries people retire around 60, and then go on to live 25 more years on average [1].
The least we could do if we want to study what happens when people have no jobs, would be to study them?
[1] http://www.helpage.org/global-agewatch/population-ageing-dat...
It's not about the joy of work or finding a convenient way to meet people for actual ordinary people, it's about knowing that the money in your bank account came from something you did, and it isn't going to go away. People don't want to be at the mercy of some faraway bureaucracy, they want to be paid for their own labor and save their own money. If you implemented a UBI system and then forced everyone to head to the labor camps, this wouldn't make them any happier; it's not about the work, it's about who they perceive as in control.
Honestly, this is the reason (as much as certain parts of the SV or HN set recoil at the thought) that it's important to have diversity across class, culture, race, and gender at these sort of discussions about broad social policy. Of course Sam Altman can jet over to the Family and say "You know, people like having to go to work every day." It's such a hilariously out-of-touch thing to even suggest I can no longer take his ideas seriously. When the first things that come into your mind when you think of a job are "having a sense of mission in your life" and "going to the office to see your cool, fun colleagues" you are too far removed from the daily reality of everyone outside your bubble to make remotely reasonable suggestions on large economic reform.
Just pay all your goddamn taxes, redistribute your wealth unconditionally, and let people have freedom over their own lives.
So bad example.
Yes, people find things to do with their time besides vegetate in front of the television. No, those things are not "unpaid jobs". Talk about question begging!
We're looking for examples of people not having to work for money and see how they cope / thrive; instead of trying to create those conditions from scratch we can start by studying people who are already in that situation.
Even though there's nothing stopping me from telecommuting instead of going to the office almost every day the thought of being alone in the house almost all day, 5 days per week, working, scares the s*it out of me. Having someone to whom you can talk during coffee breaks or whom you can see just in front of you while you're working is extremely valuable for my mental well-being. And no, SO and family don't count, I don't like mixing work with private life. We are social beings.
Take a look at Europe, with it's high youth unemployment and generous social system. Without a job people are the same, they just have more time in the day.
Much of this time is spent consuming, socializing, raising a family and creating.
The idea that a person needs (outside of financial necessity) a job is absurd. A sense of mission is attractive, but the best missions in life certainly don't involve commuting to a cubicle each day.
SV is special in this regards. I'm now realizing that's one of the main reasons I'll probably never move back home. Family, old friends, the culture of other cities will, in reality, put a bunch of shitty social pressure on you unless you're already rich and successful.
As a side note, I still bet most of this forum is against this ambitious personality, affirming at the end of the day that "there is more to life than your projects, go out and live, meet someone, fill out your social schedule, etc." That's certainly all wonderful, but it's the same social fabric that exists everywhere that's not Silicon Valley. Sam put his finger on something that is uniquely SV, and I think it's something to protect and cherish.
As another side note, I think it's kind of a shame SV is migrating to SF, because SF doesn't afford that protection. There are locals everywhere who despise the ambitious entrepreneur techie type. It's a bit of a struggle in subtle and sometimes unsubtle ways. It's obviously a face of the real world with class tension undertones and what not, but outside of maybe a few bubbles in the city which seem to me to all be in SoMa, it's just not a great environment if you are one of these ambitious personalities IMO. That and there are no late night hacker friendly cafes... why?
Yes, they don't (and maybe never will) have the same kind of tech entrepreneurship as the valley, but there's no shortage of ambitious people there.
Don't get me wrong, many good things come out of silicon valley, and it's sometimes hard to judge the worth of an idea. But there's undeniably a lot of half-hearted bullcrap whose sole purpose is to make a quick buck.
And on a personal level, the ideas are not the only things that are full of hot air.
Because you can't pay rent in SF by hosting a bunch of people who take up tables but don't buy much?
Sounds like you are conflating being ambitious with being entrepreneurial. It's possible to have a meaningful career without starting your own business, not to mention building something of value without it. And all of this is possible outside of the valley. There is a particular trajectory for a business that the valley is amenable to systemically and culturally, but that means very little.
Which is why on a personal level, after about a decade in SV, I'm very much looking forward to leaving soon, having realized that ambition, fulfilment, and impact can be realized in ways other than yet another iOS or rails app, and am getting tired of the monoculture.
My writer and filmmaker friends here in L.A. are every bit as ambitious as my entrepreneur friends up in the Bay Area. And their ambition is not only "acceptable" but celebrated.
It is precisely this ultra-narrow conception of worthwhile human endeavors that has kept me from moving up north. I love working in tech in a city where people are pursuing a huge diversity of interests and careers.
If you think that's SV you're probably not the ambitious personality type I was referring to, while also being unaware of what's getting the focus these days in SV (which is most certainly AI/ deep learning).
I've lived in more cities (3 months+) than most in this forum being a perennial digital nomad (And I don't know why people keep citing Tokyo - the culture is not pro entrepreneurship for young people at all, there is no real concept of a coworking spaces, etc. I did however meet a lot of white techies from SF so maybe that's why people are getting that impression!). It's a certain type of ambition/ personality that's encouraged here, for better or worse.
Superficially, spending a few months in a place sounds like you'll probably "get it", but I don't believe for a second that you learned much of value from each country with this lifestyle. You seem to have seen a lot of places, but you haven't lived them.
I know founders who try to be in that position by unloading the boring tasks to other people. If it is boring for you, chances are pretty good that it is boring for someone else (unless it's their chosen profession). Of course, it's a great way to gauge power - delegate something that you think is boring to see if someone will just do it without complaining. If they do it, great! You're more powerful than they are. They'll also resent you and stab you in the back when they get a chance.
It's harder than it sounds.
On a related note, can someone explain France's obsession with chatbots to me?
- American optimism on steroids; people will take you seriously when you say you're going to change the world with [some kind of unproven tech or business model]
- availability of capital.
He also said talent is evenly distributed the world over, and that over 50% of startups founded by YC come from non-US founders. But that's not the same thing as saying SV has no advantages.
"lack of real content"....It's hard to say things without it sounding negative. I think many countries have talented engineers, but I will try.
When the whole world asks if they can compete with SV, they ask it for a reason. SV is in fact - exceptional. There is no other SV. That is why the world asks "Can we compete?".
Can you imagine the reverse? There are no groups of people attending a talk in SV asking "can we compete with Paris?".
That doesn't mean that Paris, or any other city, doesn't have smart people at work on great things. I am sure they do.
But to imply there are no advantages in SV is a bit hard to believe. After all, the people in the video gathered to hear the SV expert :)
Maybe this will help.
This is Paul Graham (Y combinator) writing "How to be Silicon Valley" http://www.paulgraham.com/siliconvalley.html
There's also many country-related advantages not specific to SV but to the U.S. in general: How easy it is to create your company and work from your garage compared to other countries. This makes SV business friendly
The international crowd in SV: People from every continent share and mix their ideas, this usually leads to great results since the people who immigrate to SV for the purpose of entrepreneurship usually all share that great ambition and can bring the best of their home countries cultures and know-how.
Which particular advancement in AI / ML is he referring to?
I do think it's about to get crazy if (like Sam mentions) individuals use superior AI to attack systems.
For an analogy, its like gathering data for self driving car.
1. https://github.com/mkagenius/mitmproxy/commit/fa706a479aeecf... 2. https://github.com/mkagenius/mitmproxy/commit/407f636b4fe1bc...
We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14129541 and marked it off-topic.
OK, George Jetson, make sure and let me know when all the repetitive work in the world is replaced by an algorithm, because I don't want to miss it.
Also, he talks about the idea of a single corporation controlling the "infinite intelligence" of AI - buddy, they won't, the government will, and another government will go to war with our government for it, and it'll start WWIII. So I really wouldn't worry about who owns AI in the future. More like, invest in SpaceX to catch the first pod to Mars.
Just a slight distinction, between all jobs, "repetitive jobs" and what I mention, "repetitive part of jobs".
Interesting to compare this idea with last week's Ask HN (How much of your time at work do you spend not working?)