Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevinmchugh | Hacker News Reader

About four years ago Andreesen published this: https://a16z.com/its-time-to-build/

They were and remain big crypto investors and it's pretty weird that the essay doesn't acknowledge how much talent and money crypto sucked up. He asks where the supersonic aircraft are and - ignoring that they have awful externalities - there is actually a supersonic jet startup. A16Z hasn't invested in Boom, though, near as I can tell.

A16Z is a leading venture fund - if anyone's gonna build the future, they could use A16Z's money. So why is so much of what Andreesen wants from the future not what they've invested in?

View on HN

> there is actually a supersonic jet startup. A16Z hasn't invested in Boom, though, near as I can tell.

A quick review of their website and some cursory googling reveals that while boom is not in their portfolio they have invested in a company developing a super sonic jet engine technology (Astro Mechanica) [1] as well as a company producing precision machine parts for aerospace (Hadrian) [1] and various other companies that intersect with the area. [3] Perhaps they wanted to invest in Boom but the deal wasn’t right or they are skeptical of that particular company or they simply never got the chance but clearly they are putting their money into this area and it’s worth researching before judging them.

1. https://www.notboring.co/p/astro-mechanica

2. https://www.hadrian.co/

3. https://a16z.com/portfolio/ (Look under American dynamism)

Never forget the video where Marc was asked what is Web3 and he spent 5 minutes talking gibberish nonsense.

So... explaining "Web3"?

> So why is so much of what Andreesen wants from the future not what they've invested in?

You still want to invest in a particular company or people who you believe will make you tons of money. Just because someone is active directionally in what you believe will be the future does not necessarily mean you should put your money with them.

This makes sense as an answer but seems like an incredible indictment of venture capitalism, right? If they can't bring about a better, safer, healthier, science fiction future because it's less profitable than crypto, who can? If that essay had been a mea culpa, I'd like it a lot more

The government traditionally invests in such areas of public good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com