Clearly since Ms. Livingston was
graduated from college, she has learned a
lot about the economy, business,
start-ups, making money, getting financial
security, careers, and jobs. And likely
and apparently she got a good marriage.
Good.
History
But nearly unbroken history of at least
the past 200 years shows that the
knowledge frontier she reached keeps
moving forward. So, yes, likely Ms.
Livingston knows more about start-ups,
etc. than her mother did, but, even so, it
is not clear that she knows enough about
start-ups people in their teens and 20s
need to know now to do well to get started
on doing well in the rest of their
careers.
Do well? Sure: Have to select the good
start-ups and f'get about the rest. How
to do that? Not easily, e.g., the venture
capital world tries but, from some data
posted by VC Fred Wilson on his blog
AVC.com (1) about 2/3rds of the start-ups
he funded flop (don't do well, or some
such) and (2) on average the return on
investment (ROI) of US information
technology start-ups is poor, less good
than Ms. Livingston helped obtain in her
first job in Boston that counted the
minutes she was on her coffee breaks.
Sure, Ms. Livingston might have majored in
computer science and joined Microsoft in
1990. Alas, we come this way only once,
and we don't get do-overs or re-dos, at
least not until we get a time machine.
So, what to tell young people now?
Since Ms. Livingston is talking about
start-ups mostly in information
technology, we should consider such
things, and there is less to the
significant history there than often
meets the eye:
(1) In the 1930s, Bell saw clearly that
vacuum tubes were too big, expensive,
unreliable, and hot for the future of the
US long distance phone network. So, a
better amplifier was needed. They had a
solid state rectifier, so what about a
solid state amplifier? They started a
project. WW II got in the way, but soon
after the war, presto, bingo, fireworks in
the sky, a giant step for Bell and a much
larger step for mankind -- the transistor.
Exercise: Why so important? At the time
Bell saw the importance for civilization
and, thus, decided not to patent the
transistor. So, write an essay that might
have been written in, say, 1949, on why
the transistor should be so important.
(2) Soon enough the Cold War caused the US
DoD to want a lot of digital electronics
for aerospace, and thus, erupted from
Stanford, due in part to Dean Terman,
Silicon Valley to supply electronics to
the US DoD and later NASA.
(3) Fairly soon Silicon Valley saw how to
put several transistors on one piece of
silicon and make integrated circuits.
Gee, could make little devices! An
electronic calculator to replace all those
mechanical parts? Sure: But, still, need
a lot of transistors, maybe more than for
just a small, simple, general purpose
computer where the rest of the calculator
functions are just from software? Yup.
So, bingo, simple microprocessors.
(4) NSF: MIT had some ideas for
interactive computers with a lot of
security. So NSF funded their Project MAC
which did the operating system Multics
with an hierarchical file system and
security features capabilities and
access control lists. For
authentication, MIT did Kerberos. Then
Kerberos made use of RSA encryption, also
from MIT. Big things still with us; moving
right along here.
(5) Bell Labs again: They wanted word
whacking. DEC had a mini-computer, so
Bell borrowed a little from Multics, etc.,
wrote a simple operating system Unix
written in a simple programming language
C. Later Bjarne Stroustrup, also at Bell
Labs, wrote a pre-processor for C to
support software objects -- the
pre-processor was called C++.
Since Bell was a regulated monopoly, they
couldn't sell Unix so essentially gave it
away. A group at Berkeley, as I recall
funded by the US DoE, did more with UNIX
and made their work available as the
Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD).
Unix became Linux, and C++ and software
objects are still with us.
(6) Lots of people, not just Bell, were
struggling with typing. IBM had their
Selectric and, eventually, a correcting
Selectric with a little white ribbon that
would remove from the page a character
struck in error. But, why no actual word
whacking? Okay, Apple II, IBM PC,
WordStar, etc.
Biggie. Really big biggie.
(7) We got Microsoft that recapitulated
the mainframe history in operating
systems, and Intel came along with
microprocessors that recapitulated the
mainframe history in processors. Now
WinTel put on "every desktop" a computer
for word whacking, Microsoft Word, and
business arithmetic, Excel. Gates on the
way to being the richest person in the
world. Not too doing too badly, Paul
Allen, Charlie Simoni, Nathan Myhrvold,
etc.
(8) Ah, the US DoD again: It wanted
battlefield communications, where even if
shoot holes in some of the equipment the
rest still works and provides
communications. So, we got TCP/IP, e.g.,
in BSD, that is, we got internets. Soon
labs were connected, and we got the
Internet. Soon NSF funded it and IBM ran
it. With HTTP and HTML for a particle
physics newsletter by Tim Berners-Lee at
CERN, we got the Web. Companies put their
company brochures on the Internet.
(9) For the Internet, we needed more in
communications capacity. Enter Bell labs
again: They'd seen that one coming, too,
and had been working on Ga-Al-As (as in
the periodic table from a chemistry book)
solid state heterojunction lasers and
had the solution. Bingo: Send at 40+
billion bits per second (Gbps) on one
wavelength, some dozens of wavelength on
one fiber, some dozens of fibers in one
cable, maybe several cables along a
pipeline, electric power line, railroad
track, highway, river, ocean shoreline,
across an ocean or few, etc. Now, watch
movies!
(10) Presto, IBM and others learned more
about putting magnetic dots on surfaces,
and now we have hard disk drives in the 3
1/2" form factor size with a few
trillion bytes each. And HP is on the way
with a trillion bytes, solid state, on a
postage stamp.
So, now we can build server farms at
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft,
Apple, Amazon, etc., and we can have
start-ups like SnapChat, PInterest, Box,
etc.
So, what lessons for the future might a
young person draw from this history?
(1) Science. Off and on, some amazing
science, especially physics, played a huge
role. Maybe that will continue.
(2) Information. The desire for
information, create it, transmit it,
store it, use it, etc., seems nearly
unlimited.
(3) Logic. Want something done? Well,
describe the work in clear steps. For a
lot of work done manually in offices over
the past 100 years, such a description is
now usually fairly routine. Then with
such a description, fairly routinely can
write software to do the work. So, can
automate a huge range of old, manual work
of office workers. That's a lot of what
for some decades made IBM successful.
(4) Social. People are highly social
animals. Or to paraphrase E. Fromm, The
Art of Loving, "For humans, the
fundamental problem in life is doing
something effective about feeling alone."
In more detail, since humans are also
thinking animals, we see that alone we are
at risk, that is, vulnerable to, say, the
hostile forces of nature (earthquakes,
blizzards, tornadoes, floods, wild fires,
disease) and society (war, crime, economic
depression). Knowing that we are
vulnerable, we are worried (have
anxiety) and seek security. We feel
more vulnerable when alone so want to do
something about being alone. From Fromm
again, the first recommended solution is a
good romantic relationship. Next is a
good version of religion -- get all
wrapped up. Next is membership in a good
group -- get acceptance and approval, a
feeling of belonging. Next, not
recommended, is what some college students
try -- get drunk on alcohol, high on
drugs, and go to an orgy. So forget about
the worries until recover (but have more
worries).
So, to do something about the worries, we
want security, financial and emotional,
don't want to be lonely, do want to be
loved, want a romantic relationship, want
to belong, etc.
More generally we will want to form good
families and be in good communities.
We will be using computing and the
Internet for all they are worth for such
things.
(5) Economic Security. Likely second only
to love, and maybe more important than
love, and maybe essentially a prerequisite
to love, people want economic security,
and for that there is a famous one word
answer "more".
The drive to use logic, software,
computing, the Internet, etc. for "more"
will remain powerful for decades, maybe
centuries.
(6) Information. Now one of the keys to
more in economic security, "more", is
information, and the drive for that will
also continue for decades, etc.
For information, we take in available
data, process it, and report the resulting
information. This processing is
necessarily mathematically something,
understood or not, powerful or not. Then
clearly one approach to more powerful
processing and, thus, more powerful and
valuable information, is to use
mathematics to determine how to do the
processing.
E.g., how to look for oil? Okay, often
oil collects in pockets in the
subsurface layers. So, let's map the
layers and look for pockets. How to do
that? On the surface, have something go
"boom". Sound waves go into the ground,
and they get reflected off the layers so
that there is a convolution. So, to find
the layers, take the resulting signal and
do a deconvolution -- Enders A.
Robinson, 'Multichannel Time Series
Analysis with Digital Computer Programs'.
The fast way to do deconvolution? Sure,
the fast Fourier transform.
Once get the oil out, over here have all
that oil, from Texas, the Mideast,
Venezuela, Canada, etc. -- typically it's
all different. Over there know what can
sell -- methane, propane, gasoline,
Diesel, heating oil, motor oil, etc.
So, how to take the available input and
sell the output and make the most money?
That's a math problem, in particular in
optimization. Long the first-cut approach
was via linear optimization (programming
in the sense of operational planning).
At one time, IBM had fun selling
mainframes to Houston for just this work.
But linear programming is not quite the
right stuff. So, want some non-linear
optimization. Well, for more details, see
the work of Christodoulos A. Floudas in
chemical engineering at Princeton.
Houston does know about Professor Floudas.
There's much more to do. Right: Likely
not a single VC in the country says that
they want to see some especially valuable
software based on some especially powerful
mathematics. Hardly a one. And they are
not comfortable backing something they
understand so poorly. So, right, a lot of
confused and unhappy VCs (they so richly
deserve it!) but: Presto, bingo,
opportunity. Besides, the main raw
material into original mathematics is
paper, pencils, and coffee, and how
expensive are those?
Almost inevitably, there will be only a
few people going that way with the rest
heaping ridicule, etc. Not nearly new:
Think of the Mother Goose story The
Little Red Hen.
Secret: It turns out, no matter how much
advanced and/or original mathematics you
use, nearly always a lot of the actual
computations will boil down to linear
algebra and there, numerical linear
algebra. So, take linear algebra,
elementary, intermediate, advanced,
applied, numerical, and related subjects
such as linear programming, non-linear
programming, multi-variate statistics,
ordinary and partial differential
equations and their numerical solutions.
For more, study the leading
generalizations of linear algebra,
functional analysis, e.g., Hilbert and
Banach spaces.
(7) Niches. One of the standard ways to
make money is to have close to a monopoly,
and one of the standard ways to do that is
to have a niche of some kind and where
the monopoly is protected by, say, a
geographical barrier to entry, an
especially good product or service, some
crucial, core, defensible technology or
know-how, a good customer list, some
network effect, etc.
History
But nearly unbroken history of at least the past 200 years shows that the knowledge frontier she reached keeps moving forward. So, yes, likely Ms. Livingston knows more about start-ups, etc. than her mother did, but, even so, it is not clear that she knows enough about start-ups people in their teens and 20s need to know now to do well to get started on doing well in the rest of their careers.
Do well? Sure: Have to select the good start-ups and f'get about the rest. How to do that? Not easily, e.g., the venture capital world tries but, from some data posted by VC Fred Wilson on his blog AVC.com (1) about 2/3rds of the start-ups he funded flop (don't do well, or some such) and (2) on average the return on investment (ROI) of US information technology start-ups is poor, less good than Ms. Livingston helped obtain in her first job in Boston that counted the minutes she was on her coffee breaks.
Sure, Ms. Livingston might have majored in computer science and joined Microsoft in 1990. Alas, we come this way only once, and we don't get do-overs or re-dos, at least not until we get a time machine.
So, what to tell young people now?
Since Ms. Livingston is talking about start-ups mostly in information technology, we should consider such things, and there is less to the significant history there than often meets the eye:
(1) In the 1930s, Bell saw clearly that vacuum tubes were too big, expensive, unreliable, and hot for the future of the US long distance phone network. So, a better amplifier was needed. They had a solid state rectifier, so what about a solid state amplifier? They started a project. WW II got in the way, but soon after the war, presto, bingo, fireworks in the sky, a giant step for Bell and a much larger step for mankind -- the transistor.
Exercise: Why so important? At the time Bell saw the importance for civilization and, thus, decided not to patent the transistor. So, write an essay that might have been written in, say, 1949, on why the transistor should be so important.
(2) Soon enough the Cold War caused the US DoD to want a lot of digital electronics for aerospace, and thus, erupted from Stanford, due in part to Dean Terman, Silicon Valley to supply electronics to the US DoD and later NASA.
(3) Fairly soon Silicon Valley saw how to put several transistors on one piece of silicon and make integrated circuits. Gee, could make little devices! An electronic calculator to replace all those mechanical parts? Sure: But, still, need a lot of transistors, maybe more than for just a small, simple, general purpose computer where the rest of the calculator functions are just from software? Yup. So, bingo, simple microprocessors.
(4) NSF: MIT had some ideas for interactive computers with a lot of security. So NSF funded their Project MAC which did the operating system Multics with an hierarchical file system and security features capabilities and access control lists. For authentication, MIT did Kerberos. Then Kerberos made use of RSA encryption, also from MIT. Big things still with us; moving right along here.
(5) Bell Labs again: They wanted word whacking. DEC had a mini-computer, so Bell borrowed a little from Multics, etc., wrote a simple operating system Unix written in a simple programming language C. Later Bjarne Stroustrup, also at Bell Labs, wrote a pre-processor for C to support software objects -- the pre-processor was called C++.
Since Bell was a regulated monopoly, they couldn't sell Unix so essentially gave it away. A group at Berkeley, as I recall funded by the US DoE, did more with UNIX and made their work available as the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD).
Unix became Linux, and C++ and software objects are still with us.
(6) Lots of people, not just Bell, were struggling with typing. IBM had their Selectric and, eventually, a correcting Selectric with a little white ribbon that would remove from the page a character struck in error. But, why no actual word whacking? Okay, Apple II, IBM PC, WordStar, etc.
Biggie. Really big biggie.
(7) We got Microsoft that recapitulated the mainframe history in operating systems, and Intel came along with microprocessors that recapitulated the mainframe history in processors. Now WinTel put on "every desktop" a computer for word whacking, Microsoft Word, and business arithmetic, Excel. Gates on the way to being the richest person in the world. Not too doing too badly, Paul Allen, Charlie Simoni, Nathan Myhrvold, etc.
(8) Ah, the US DoD again: It wanted battlefield communications, where even if shoot holes in some of the equipment the rest still works and provides communications. So, we got TCP/IP, e.g., in BSD, that is, we got internets. Soon labs were connected, and we got the Internet. Soon NSF funded it and IBM ran it. With HTTP and HTML for a particle physics newsletter by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN, we got the Web. Companies put their company brochures on the Internet.
(9) For the Internet, we needed more in communications capacity. Enter Bell labs again: They'd seen that one coming, too, and had been working on Ga-Al-As (as in the periodic table from a chemistry book) solid state heterojunction lasers and had the solution. Bingo: Send at 40+ billion bits per second (Gbps) on one wavelength, some dozens of wavelength on one fiber, some dozens of fibers in one cable, maybe several cables along a pipeline, electric power line, railroad track, highway, river, ocean shoreline, across an ocean or few, etc. Now, watch movies!
(10) Presto, IBM and others learned more about putting magnetic dots on surfaces, and now we have hard disk drives in the 3 1/2" form factor size with a few trillion bytes each. And HP is on the way with a trillion bytes, solid state, on a postage stamp.
So, now we can build server farms at Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, etc., and we can have start-ups like SnapChat, PInterest, Box, etc.