Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

Indeed, this is a call for government sponsored anti trust efforts (pruning and holding back the forest so saplings can take root and grow) and incubators (Solyndra failed, but Tesla paid back their loan in full, with interest, ahead of schedule). But, you'll have people claim "that isn't efficient! the private sector can do better!" while the evidence (here) is that the private sector cannot do better. It just creates a wasteful, capital inefficient ecosystem where everyone performs theater around the concept of venture.

Sometimes you're lucky, most times you are not (as it relates to highly speculative investments of this kind).

View on HN

> But, you'll have people claim "that isn't efficient! the private sector can do better!"

They might, but, if you are going to let the private sector do better, doesn't that also come with the implication that that the government will step down? We could, for example, have hundreds of businesses selling Windows, Office, etc., fixing the Microsoft problem spoken of earlier, but we can't do that right now because the government doesn't allow it. Try starting a business selling Windows and see how long before the full force of the law is bearing down on you. That certainly isn't efficient.

Who wants to buy Windows nowadays? They’re practically giving it away.

Venture driven tech is crazy and wasteful, but it's nothing compared to government. How many electric car chargers did the Biden administration build with billions of dollars? A handful. Look at another post today about the fact that Britain can't build a new rail line for a reasonable price.

I would say compared to just these examples, the private sector is doing better.

They haven’t spent the charger building money yet, fella

So we can say the government is doing a good job helping the private sector look better.

> I would say compared to just these examples, the private sector is doing better.

I'm not going to argue subjective opinion, but simply point out that investors seeking venture exposure should familiarize themselves with the accredited investor test Matt Levine of Bloomberg's Money Stuff suggests:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-10-22/the-so... | https://archive.today/dytZs

> I have proposed my own solution, which I call the “Certificate of Dumb Investment.” The idea is that anyone can go to the SEC and ask for the certificate, which says:

> I want to buy a dumb investment. I understand that the person selling it will almost certainly steal all my money, and that I would almost certainly be better off just buying index funds, but I want to do this dumb thing anyway. I agree that I will never, under any circumstances, complain to anyone when this investment inevitably goes wrong. I understand that violating this agreement is a felony.

> And then the SEC will slap you in the face and say “really?” and if you say “yes really” then they give you the certificate and you can buy whatever private investment you want.

Who am I to get in the way of unsophisticated money doing unsophisticated things? That's not government waste, that's freedom. If you think you can do better, and prefer venture over a DraftKings account, 0DTE options, or a lottery ticket, go for it. That mental model is sophisticated money opportunity.

Tangential: https://longbets.org/362/

It's a false dichotomy. Big business is finance is government is media. The trains are expensive and late and crowded because nobody with power cares if they are cheap or finished or usable -- they have private drivers, private jets, private everything. The oligarchy is responsible, and sure they are in the so-called public sector, but are also obviously outside it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com