Hacker News Reader

Interesting talk. Some parts of the reasoning that might need work:

"if there was no possibility to get rich, there would be no startups".

Does not explain patronage, i.e. people investing in people for reasons other than getting rich.

"without start-ups, there would be slower rates of technological growth".

Prizes, like the Ansari X-Prize, is another model that drives innovation, it can be viewed as a low-risk investment.

The amount of money flowing from patronage pales in comparison to the capital of the VC industry. Patronage could never take over later rounds. There would still be bootstrapped startups, but far less of them. Another thought is that 10% weekly growth would flat out kill many businesses without access to easy capital. I don't think the statement "without start-ups, there would be slower rates of technological growth" is debatable.

And if you classified Kickstarter as a kind of patronage would it still pale in comparison? If nothing else, no-one backs a project to get rich.

The USSR put Sputnik into space so they get rich, lol.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com