On stage with Nathan Myhrvold and Greg Brandeau of PIXAR.

Some of my favorite quotes (memorable, simple and profound):

Reid Hoffman on the secret to success in startup ideas:
“You have to be contrarian and correct.”

Guru Singh’s feedback to Nathan Myhrvold’s pet projects:
“You must find people who are as ridiculous as you.”

From Forbes: “Jurvetson gave a brief presentation that proved to be inspiring to those hoping to play a role in changing the world. Talking about the technology curve that allows for the self-driving car to outperform humans in many situations already, Jurvetson noted that “my children may be among the first generation of people who will never learn to drive.” He quipped that “SpaceX will make it cheaper to fly around the earth in space than by air.” He also noted that “in the future, all cars will be electric” and with that, challenged the naysayers to argue the point after the session.”

Oh, and I just found the conference notes on this panel from my Skype friend Sten Tamkivi:

• Science is as close to magic as anything we have. When you understand a new aspect about how nature works, you can do something that looks like an utterly unfair advantage to everyone else.

• Humanity has never really had a positive arc heading to the future. It was more about ups & downs, bad and good seasons, cyclic on the field. Moore’s law has been heading up for 110 years now!

• Innovation is ideas having sex.

• SpaceX has lowered the cost of space flight by 10X – only natural if the underlying tech had not been touched for 25 years. It will get another 10X when you make rockets reusable – imagine throwing away a plane after every flight! It will be cheaper to fly around a world in a rocket on orbit than an equivalent plane. First for one person, then 7, then for 100.

• Already today there are more electric vehicle drivers in China than cars in the US. 1300 manufacturers, mostly 2-wheelers still. EV is inevitable, US spends $2B/day on car fuel.

• Drop in cost of reading and writing gene data is making Moore’s law look flat.

• Humanoid robots in production are replicating unskilled labor – learning and optimising what they do by watching the routine hand movements.

• When the Human Genome Project started, biology was not one of the “big science” areas for funding – natural counter pressure from incumbent areas to its rise.

• It we don’t discover anything surprisingly new beyond the Higgs boson from LHC, it will be much harder to raise funds for next $10B+ core science research project

• Recurring arguments on the “end of innovation” are flawed. Look at single country, single industry numbers. Look at median salaries not raising in US since 1975 – ignoring averages and growing poor-rich gaps. Ignoring structural changes in parallel (employment in agriculture -> manufacturing -> …)

• Killing a cow is the least effective way to make a steak.

• $100M satellites in orbit are less powerful than modern phones.

11 responses to “@ The Intersection”

  1. On a related coincidence, just flipped through Time magazine and there was another piece, based on a JPMorgan report I think, claiming a slowdown in tech innovation and even somehow linking it to be "good for jobs"… *yawn* Oh boy, shall they be surprised. 🙂

    (The text is behind paywall here: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2134521,00.html)

  2. They forget to look to the new and lament the eventual decline of the prior giants…

    Here are some more photos from Jordan Ching…. brainstorming with Nathan:

    IMG_8830

    Each of us was asked to write down things that we are grateful for on the lightbulb. I wrote: "kids, empathy, entrepreneurs, Nikola Tesla, the scientific method"

    IMG_8828

  3. i wholeheartedly agree with your choices.
    i would have substituted Nikola with Mandelbrot but that’s it.

  4. Do you remember Jack Benny? I ask because in the picture at the top of the page you are doing Benny’s shtick.

  5. @David Seaton — Never seen him (and did a google image search to see if it would job my memory). I think I was just a few years too late (and with parents who were not media hipsters of the day). Have a canonical YouTube link to share?

    @scleroplex — cool! My answers were very different from the others (mostly family and health pablum). So I’m curious, why Benoit?

  6. > jurvetson – people underestimate the bravery of his decisions when still a young man and his commitment to going and doing what felt right.
    and not what everyone said was the safe option – finding a career sponsor and staying low.
    i adore such clarity and strength!
    along with Solzhenitsyn, Benoit has been my daily hero for many many years.
    this is him with me at MIT in 2006 –
    i presented him a reprint of my paper on the nonlinear dynamics of multiple sclerosis attacks, a very short paper using Ruelle’s method for time-series analysis

    with prof. benoit mandelbrot at MIT 5 Nov 2006
    i hasten to add the Harvard tie is just to put others in place if needed.
    i couldn’t be happier personally to leave.
    just like Benoit, they didn’t want me around either :-))

  7. here is a classic case of what Benoit talked about – beyond.blogs.france24.com/article/2013/01/26/jean-sarkozy…
    "Sarkozy son awarded teaching job… before finishing his own studies

    Power-hungry and resolute, Jean Sarkozy is much like a younger, taller, blonder, version of his father. At the grand-old age of 26, he has already accomplished a career in politics, married a wealthy heiress, and produced two grandchildren for Nicolas.

    Now, he’s set to become a law professor at the Créteil University of East Paris (UPEC)."

    Benoit walked away

  8. @scleroplex There are different paths in this world, I think Jean Sarkozy will end up like Lance Armstrong… or DSK.

  9. The idea that the replacement of unskilled workers by technology will increase inequality or even should increase inequality is deeply flawed. Innovation and technology are only useful if they improve productivity or quality of life. This technology and these innovations should therefor improve the wealth of society. How that wealth is distributed is a separate question. In fact for a good economy in which there is DEMAND for the new technology and the goods and services it affords the wealth should be distributed more evenly. Of course the CEO’s all become billionaires, that is absolutely fine, but people who work for them and others deserve to share the fruits of endeavor. They are part of society and a fair society is very much better than an unfair society. Even Henry Bloget thinks so …much to my surprise. http://www.businessinsider.com.au/rich-people-create-jobs-2013-1...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *