Well, the weather probably is a comparatively small factor, but nonreplicable geographic factors are actually a major factor in the success of most economic hubs, including the Bay Area (aesthetically great weather is one, but a great natural port area, and proximity to abundant agriculture, are also factors.)
Yeah, you can't copy some of those things. Geography matters, it always has.
Way too hot, hazardous weather, impossible to get around (crazy traffic congestions, no useful public transporation, bicycling being suicidal), have to go to Home Depot to get real Coca Cola.
Overall quite "meh".
it's united states overall, so it doesn't really matter.
>> crazy traffic congestion
It matters. I once pulled out of the Sutter-Stockton garage and sat in traffic for a full hour without getting to the end of the block.
Now it's SV despite all that.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Mediterr...
...or more likely, the weather is not a critical issue.
My intuition says that Silicon Valley wouldn't be possible in a beach town nor in a place that's too cold or too hot, simply because of how much the weather would distract you from work. The great thing about the weather in the Valley is that it's pleasantly bland (or blandly pleasant?).
But I think it's very likely that the weather doesn't matter at all if you don't already have some equivalent of the Stanford-Berkeley nexus and California labor law and a lot of very rich people willing to make high-risk investments.
As to “Is there even a point to trying?” No. No in two ways, in decreasing confidence.
Places that don’t have all the parts definitely shouldn’t try to copy Silicon Valley. If you can’t do things the way that they did them then... don’t try to do things the way that they did them. I don’t know how to express that without being circular.
Should any city try to become the next Silicon Whatever* at all? No, probably not. That’s simply because I don’t think there’s a city government in the world capable of doing it. Maybe there would be some benefit in the attempt, but I’m guessing it would be outweighed by the cost. It’s just not the kind of things governments actually do.
*btw all those names make feel a bit ill. Does no city’s Chamber of Commerce see the irony of branding themselves as an innovation hub by copying another city’s nickname?
Editing in more.
> #1, nobody knows which parts of an ensemble of practices are the central parts. It's quite true that, because of this problem, people just try to copy as much as they can.
I don’t know. I think sometimes people know. At least try. Like maybe my description of Silicon Valley is totally wrong. But at least it’s logical and you can choose to follow it or not.
And if you’re going to follow someone as a guru (like the tweet I linked to) then follow their belief on what’s central. And if you don’t agree then don’t follow them! Because you wouldn’t be following them anyway. You’d be following some hybrid half version of them that you created yourself.
I think things get all fucked up when people half follow systems. It’s fine if you take a tiny cohesive piece, like folding your shirts differently cause you saw Marie Kondo do it that way. And it’s fine if you go all in on Tidying Up. But when you rip through every item you own and end up with a giant pile of non-joy in your apartment that you never actually get rid of, you’re fucked. (If anyone is getting Agile flashbacks, I’m inspiring the right vibes).
Don't think it's particularly startup-friendly though.
He spends a good part of the book complaining about french research, which does not care about products impact and thus is very theoretical, but also about the heavy hand of the government in dictating where innovation happens.
He also talks about Sophia-Antipolis. It started with a boom, and a lot of tax credits to incentivize corporations. But after the subvention dried up, many companies left. It seems to me that most of the companies left do not have innovation in their DNA.
> The recipe for success of Silicon Valley is pretty straightforward. It has great colleges, great weather, and weak noncompetes.
There are a couple of interesting things about these comments.
#1, nobody knows which parts of an ensemble of practices are the central parts. It's quite true that, because of this problem, people just try to copy as much as they can.
But then we lead into #2, your comments on the recipe for success. Among your central points, literally placed in the center, is "great weather". That can't be copied. You have the weather you have. What should the other 99.999% of the world do? Is there even a point in trying?