The clash of two cultures: "I can" and "I can not"

Original author: Ben Horowitz
  • Transfer
An intelligent person adapts to the environment; unreasonable trying to adapt the environment for himself. Consequently, progress rests on unreasonable people.
George Bernard Shaw.

image
Recently, it has become fashionable to scold young technology companies. “What an idiotic idea a startup has” or “what a nerd founded this company.”

It seems that there is a desire to replace the culture of start-ups, where hope and curiosity rule, with primordial superiority.

Why is it important? Why do we care about mood decline in the wrong direction? Why is it more important to see what is good in a company than to find flaws in it?

“Technology” is “an improved way to do something.” Easy to say, but hard to do. The best way to store information, the best currency, the best way to make friends - for this you need to try to change for the better the millennia-old experience of mankind, and this is always difficult.

If you think about it, from the point of view of logic, nothing can be improved at all. If for thousands of years of civilization no one has thought of this before, why did you decide that you are so smart? From a psychological point of view, in order to improve something, you need to constantly eliminate this kind of doubt. The world of technology startups is a world where smart people can imagine the impossible.

As an investor, I am often asked: why are large companies so hard to innovate, while small ones make it easy? And usually my answer is surprising. Large companies have many great ideas, but they have to go through a huge hierarchy of people, each of whom must approve the idea. If someone suddenly finds a flaw in an idea, this is usually enough to bury it.

This is how the culture “Can't” is born.

The problem with innovation is that at the time of their emergence, these ideas seem bad. That is why they are innovative - until now, no one has understood that they are good. Creative big companies like Amazon and Google are driven by innovators. Larry Page can unilaterally fund a good idea that looks like a bad one, and dismiss all objections as to why this is not possible.

This is how the “Mogu” culture is born.

Some want to turn the world of technology startups into one giant company with a backward “can not” culture. This article is an attempt to prevent them.

Texts denouncing new technologies have always existed. Sometimes criticism is justified when the invention of the company does not work - but even then it is not able to see the big picture. Here are a couple of examples from the story.

In 1837, Charles Babbage was planning to build the “ Analytical Machine ” - the world's first general-purpose computer (mechanical), moreover, having Turing completeness. Roughly speaking, with the power available, he could count everything that a modern computer can count.

He was unable to build a working computer - after all, in 1837 it was incredibly ambitious to talk about a wooden computer running on a couple. And in 1842, the English mathematician and astronomer George Biddel Airy issued his expert opinion to the British government fund: this project is “useless” and must be closed. The government did so. Only in 1941 did the project get a logical continuation - after being forgotten and rejected for a hundred years.

After 171, it was clear that Babbage had foreseen the future and that computers were far from worthless. And his most important achievement is not that he was 100 years ahead of his time, but that he had a vision and perseverance to achieve his goal. He remains the inspiration for many to this day. And Mr. Airy was just a short-sighted eccentric.

Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, proposed his invention to the leading telegraph company, Western Union, for $ 100,000. The proposal was rejected based on the report. Here are a few excerpts from there:

“The telephone involves the transfer of votes by telegraph wire. The transmitted voice was weak and poorly distinguishable, and it becomes even weaker with increasing distance and length of wires. It’s technically incomprehensible how this device can transmit voice over distances of at least several miles. ”

“Messer Hubbard and Bell want to install their“ telephone devices ”in every city. This idea is idiotic. Moreover, who might need such a clumsy and impractical device, when everyone can send a messenger to the telegraph and send a clear written message to any major US city? ”

“Our engineers have made significant improvements in telegraph business today, and we see no reason to indulge a group of extravagant upstart nonprofessionals when they have no idea about the real problems of the industry. Predictions of Mr. J.J. Hubbard, although vibrant, is based only on the wild imagination, they lack an understanding of the technical and economic realities of our time. They simply ignore the obvious limitations of their device, which is nothing more than a toy. ”

“ In connection with the foregoing, we consider the request of one hundred thousand dollars for the use of a patent unreasonable and do not recommend acquiring it ”

Nowadays, everyone recognizes the importance of the Internet. And in 1995, astronomer Clifford Stoll wrote an article in Newsweek entitled “Why the Network

Won't Turn Into Nirvana”: “And now about cyber business. We are promised instant purchases in the catalog - point and click. We will book flights through the network, reserve tables in restaurants and discuss contracts. Ordinary shops will disappear.
So why is the daily sales volume of my nearest supermarket more than the entire Internet in a month? Even if there was a reliable way to transfer money via the Internet (and it doesn’t), the Web lacks the most important ingredient of capitalism: sellers. ”

What common mistake did all these wise men make? They focused on what technology could not do at the time it arose. And they did not think at all about what she could achieve in the future.

Who is most affected by the “Can't” culture? Ironically, those who hate technology. Those who focus on what technology (or the company) cannot do will never have the courage to do what other people find stupid. They will not be able to learn from great innovators. They will be shortsighted and will not open a brilliant engineer who can change the world faster than they do. Their cynicism will prevent them from inspiring anyone for something great. History will laugh at them.

[ addition from the translator]. As Henry Ford said, “If you say that you cannot do something, you are right. If you say that you can do something, you are right too. ”

Also popular now: