Comments on: Q&A with John Doerr http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/ News About Tech, Money and Innovation Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:52:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Nodalities » Blog Archive » John Doerr on Web 3.0 and more at the Web 2.0 Summit http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-804343 Nodalities » Blog Archive » John Doerr on Web 3.0 and more at the Web 2.0 Summit Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:59:19 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-804343 [...] VentureBeat’s reminder that video from his session is available offered a welcome chance to go back and consider John’s comments at leisure… and they’re well worth your time, too. [...] [...] VentureBeat’s reminder that video from his session is available offered a welcome chance to go back and consider John’s comments at leisure… and they’re well worth your time, too. [...]

]]> By: Q&A with John Doerr « The “Meta” Internet: The genesis of a “virtual” Silicon Valleys leveraging the power of the Internet. http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-745418 Q&A with John Doerr « The “Meta” Internet: The genesis of a “virtual” Silicon Valleys leveraging the power of the Internet. Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:48:09 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-745418 [...] Equity Digg thisBookmark this Print version Email story Sphere [...] [...] Equity Digg thisBookmark this Print version Email story Sphere [...]

]]> By: Shared database MetaWeb gets $42M boost « The “Meta” Internet: The genesis of a “virtual” Silicon Valleys leveraging the power of the Internet. http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-744760 Shared database MetaWeb gets $42M boost « The “Meta” Internet: The genesis of a “virtual” Silicon Valleys leveraging the power of the Internet. Mon, 21 Jan 2008 01:12:45 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-744760 [...] investment is considerable, and comes at a time when a number of experts are betting that a more powerful, “semantic” Web is about to emerge, where data about information is much [...] [...] investment is considerable, and comes at a time when a number of experts are betting that a more powerful, “semantic” Web is about to emerge, where data about information is much [...]

]]> By: VentureBeat » Shared database MetaWeb gets $42M boost http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-733210 VentureBeat » Shared database MetaWeb gets $42M boost Tue, 15 Jan 2008 05:34:41 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-733210 [...] investment is considerable, and comes at a time when a number of experts are betting that a more powerful, “semantic” Web is about to emerge, where data about information [...] [...] investment is considerable, and comes at a time when a number of experts are betting that a more powerful, “semantic” Web is about to emerge, where data about information [...]

]]> By: Harvey http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-646788 Harvey Fri, 23 Nov 2007 20:11:11 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-646788 Global warming may or may not be stopped or reversed or actually be a problem. BUT energy independence is a necessity!! For geopolitical reasons!! Global warming may or may not be stopped or reversed or actually be a problem. BUT energy independence is a necessity!! For geopolitical reasons!!

]]> By: Al Gorbachev http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-645878 Al Gorbachev Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:04:26 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-645878 Consensus sucks. Consensus sucks.

]]> By: Naane http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-645752 Naane Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:16:01 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-645752 Consensus is a great word. Doerr made the mistake of using the word "everyone" - all you need is for one person to disagree and he's immediately wrong. "Consensus", though, allows the possibility of some nuts who aren't engaging in Correct Thought. But not only can there be consensus with dissent, the dissent is made irrelevant by the existence of the consensus. It's an even better word than 'majority', which requires you to prove that more than 50% agree. To prove a consensus you just have to say things like 'open up any newspaper or magazine'. To put it simply, a consensus is defined by media, business, politicians, and generally those who 'matter'. A majority is defined by everyone, even the people who don't matter at all, which is why it's so annoying. For some reason people resolutely refuse to believe what their self-appointed thought leaders tell them to believe. They ask awkward questions, like how this century's belief that natural disasters are the direct result of mankind's misdeeds is any different from when the Biblical 40-day flood was blamed on human sin, as was virtually every natural disaster since we invented religion. Consensus doesn't ask awkward questions. Consensus just knows, and is self-reinforcing. Why should people pay to stop global warming? Because of the consensus that global warming exists. Why is there a consensus that global warming exists? Well, if there wasn't a consensus that it exists, why would people be paying to stop it? I'm sure Doerr just made a slip of the tongue and will use Approved Vocabulary in future in order to ensure continuing Correct Thought, not to mention money. Consensus is a great word. Doerr made the mistake of using the word “everyone” – all you need is for one person to disagree and he’s immediately wrong. “Consensus”, though, allows the possibility of some nuts who aren’t engaging in Correct Thought. But not only can there be consensus with dissent, the dissent is made irrelevant by the existence of the consensus. It’s an even better word than ‘majority’, which requires you to prove that more than 50% agree. To prove a consensus you just have to say things like ‘open up any newspaper or magazine’.

To put it simply, a consensus is defined by media, business, politicians, and generally those who ‘matter’. A majority is defined by everyone, even the people who don’t matter at all, which is why it’s so annoying. For some reason people resolutely refuse to believe what their self-appointed thought leaders tell them to believe. They ask awkward questions, like how this century’s belief that natural disasters are the direct result of mankind’s misdeeds is any different from when the Biblical 40-day flood was blamed on human sin, as was virtually every natural disaster since we invented religion.

Consensus doesn’t ask awkward questions. Consensus just knows, and is self-reinforcing. Why should people pay to stop global warming? Because of the consensus that global warming exists. Why is there a consensus that global warming exists? Well, if there wasn’t a consensus that it exists, why would people be paying to stop it?

I’m sure Doerr just made a slip of the tongue and will use Approved Vocabulary in future in order to ensure continuing Correct Thought, not to mention money.

]]> By: Web 2.0 Asia http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-645430 Web 2.0 Asia Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:37:49 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-645430 Well, as far as I know, it's the oil companies who are afraid of the debates... they are so afraid that they have to "buy" scientists to publish reports saying that there's no such thing as global warming or that the oil wells won't dry for another 100 years... Speaking of the consensus thing, please tell me if you open up any newspaper or magazine these days and don't find green/cleantech related article there. Now, is that not "consensus" enough? Well, as far as I know, it’s the oil companies who are afraid of the debates… they are so afraid that they have to “buy” scientists to publish reports saying that there’s no such thing as global warming or that the oil wells won’t dry for another 100 years… Speaking of the consensus thing, please tell me if you open up any newspaper or magazine these days and don’t find green/cleantech related article there. Now, is that not “consensus” enough?

]]> By: Thumbster http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-644926 Thumbster Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:52:49 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-644926 Tom, let's put aside that pesky lack of scientific support for anthropogenic global warming, there's a consensus. Sure consensus is a political term and not a scientific one, but embrace the hype. Just as there was consensus among scientists that the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth and DDT was thinning egg shells (resulting in a ban that kills 2M people a year in sub-Saharan Africa). Embrace the politics of global warming...and the financial gain. The green investment money and Al Gore's $100M annual income from hype, speaking fees and carbon offsets are really a good thing, just as Yassir being the father of modern terrorism is a good thing. Debate Over! Tom, let’s put aside that pesky lack of scientific support for anthropogenic global warming, there’s a consensus. Sure consensus is a political term and not a scientific one, but embrace the hype. Just as there was consensus among scientists that the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth and DDT was thinning egg shells (resulting in a ban that kills 2M people a year in sub-Saharan Africa). Embrace the politics of global warming…and the financial gain. The green investment money and Al Gore’s $100M annual income from hype, speaking fees and carbon offsets are really a good thing, just as Yassir being the father of modern terrorism is a good thing. Debate Over!

]]> By: Tom http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/comment-page-1/#comment-644786 Tom Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:08:55 +0000 http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/21/qa-with-john-doerr/#comment-644786 I enjoyed this piece. My one issue was Doerr's comment on climate change (paraphrasing here): "The debate is over. Al Gore winning the Nobel Prize tells us that everyone is in agreement." Yassir Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize years ago and I would argue the "debate" as to whether he was mainly a terrorist is alive and well today. A "subjective" Nobel prize does not mean consensus of anything, it's not hard science, it's marketing. The climate change crowd loves the "debate is over phrase" mainly because they are afraid of the "debate". Scientific problems should always be open to scrutiny and debate. I enjoyed this piece. My one issue was Doerr’s comment on climate change (paraphrasing here): “The debate is over. Al Gore winning the Nobel Prize tells us that everyone is in agreement.”

Yassir Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize years ago and I would argue the “debate” as to whether he was mainly a terrorist is alive and well today. A “subjective” Nobel prize does not mean consensus of anything, it’s not hard science, it’s marketing.

The climate change crowd loves the “debate is over phrase” mainly because they are afraid of the “debate”. Scientific problems should always be open to scrutiny and debate.

]]>