Yesterday at one of our bi-monthly team deep dives at USV, we got into the conversation of essentially "Big Innovation" vs. "Small Innovation". Those who have followed USV for some time know that at the core of the investment thesis is a belief in "decentralized", "bottom-up" innovation -- the kind that really became possible with the advent of the web. Given that, one of the market condition / policy issues that we care about is consolidation and excessive market power -- the potential for small players and new entrants to get blocked from a market by entrenched incumbents. For example, this is why we care about the Open Internet and have supported the FCC's rules to prevent ISPs and telcos from blocking or throttling web-based applications and content. This issue, of course, is not limited to ISPs and telcos -- there is also a similar concern at the application / platform level: when does Google / Apple / Amazon / Facebook / Uber become too big? What does too big mean? What are the risks to "bottom up" innovation when that happens? What should be done about it? Which led us to the flip side of the bottom-up innovation argument: the value of "big" innovation -- innovation that's possible because of size and scale. For example, Uber is able to offer an incredible customer experience because they have invested in building a big, liquid, network (currently at a
Yesterday at one of our bi-monthly team deep dives at USV, we got into the conversation of essentially "Big Innovation" vs. "Small Innovation". Those who have followed USV for some time know that at the core of the investment thesis is a belief in "decentralized", "bottom-up" innovation -- the kind that really became possible with the advent of the web. Given that, one of the market condition / policy issues that we care about is consolidation and excessive market power -- the potential for small players and new entrants to get blocked from a market by entrenched incumbents. For example, this is why we care about the Open Internet and have supported the FCC's rules to prevent ISPs and telcos from blocking or throttling web-based applications and content. This issue, of course, is not limited to ISPs and telcos -- there is also a similar concern at the application / platform level: when does Google / Apple / Amazon / Facebook / Uber become too big? What does too big mean? What are the risks to "bottom up" innovation when that happens? What should be done about it? Which led us to the flip side of the bottom-up innovation argument: the value of "big" innovation -- innovation that's possible because of size and scale. For example, Uber is able to offer an incredible customer experience because they have invested in building a big, liquid, network (currently at a
, but that's part of the strategy at this point). In this case, "big" enables a kind of innovation that wouldn't be possible otherwise. The whole world now knows that it's possible to summon a ride immediately at the push of a button. That's a real innovation, with real practical implications for lots of people. Or take Amazon: their bigness means that I can get almost anything delivered to my house, for free, in 2 days or less. Embodied in that are huge consumer innovations (I shop very differently than I did previously, and it's way more convenient), and huge organizational innovations, in terms of supply chain management, logistics, etc. Or AWS: perhaps Amazon's greatest achievement has been
pointed out) been a total boon to "bottom-up" innovation, by drastically lowering the cost and complexity of building and deploying a web application. Practically every new startup begins by using AWS for their infrastructure, and some large degree, we can thank Amazon for this gift to the startup sector. And on and on -- it's relatively easy to find examples of "big" innovations that add up to huge consumer benefit. Where it gets a little tricker, though, is when you flip the perspective and look at these same big platforms, not from the consumer perspective, but from the supplier perspective. If you're a marketplace seller on amazon, or an uber driver, or an app developer trying to get distribution through the App Store or Facebook, you are keenly aware of the perils of relying on a big platform for distribution (e.g., not "
"). The bigger the platform, the more they can offer you in terms of access to customers, but the more control they can exert, regarding pricing and terms. This is where the tension between big innovation and small innovation lives. What to do about it? It depends. When things become grotesquely anti-competitive and anti-consumer, the government steps in with regulations or antitrust enforcement this is not ideal, but sometimes it's necessary. Alternatively, sometimes there's a market opportunity to serve the supply-side on better terms, as
. What really stands out to me, as I write this, is the tendency for "big" to be great for the demand side, but bad for the supply side. So, where "bottom up" innovation depends on a thriving and diverse supply side of the market (whether that's gig workers, content creators, app developers, or users in a social network contributing their content), we need to be on the lookout for ways to make sure that "big" doesn't get in the way and squelch that. While at the same time, recognizing that "big" can bring lots of direct benefits to consumers.
We've got a few Beam telepresence robots at USV, and use them all the time. Fred has written about them here. We had a team meeting today, and we had two beams going at once -- Fred and I were the first to arrive, and we were chatting beam-to-beam -- he in LAUtah, me in Boston, both of us in NYC by robot:
It works amazingly well. It has now become somewhat normal for robots to be roving around the office, having conversations w people, USV team folks and visitors alike. One idea that keeps coming up is an extensible peripherals API -- the Beam robots already come w a USB port (used for initial setup), and it should be possible to use that to extend it with hardware. We joke about jousting (and have done some), but I could seriously imagine bolting on devices such as additional displays / LCDs, sensors of various kinds, devices that can perform human-like gestures (the way the Kubi can nod, shake and bow), etc. Thinking of Beam as a platform in this way would certainly extend its capabilities (in particular for industry), and would also position Beam in a much stronger position at the center of an ecosystem. Would love to see that happen.
, but that's part of the strategy at this point). In this case, "big" enables a kind of innovation that wouldn't be possible otherwise. The whole world now knows that it's possible to summon a ride immediately at the push of a button. That's a real innovation, with real practical implications for lots of people. Or take Amazon: their bigness means that I can get almost anything delivered to my house, for free, in 2 days or less. Embodied in that are huge consumer innovations (I shop very differently than I did previously, and it's way more convenient), and huge organizational innovations, in terms of supply chain management, logistics, etc. Or AWS: perhaps Amazon's greatest achievement has been
pointed out) been a total boon to "bottom-up" innovation, by drastically lowering the cost and complexity of building and deploying a web application. Practically every new startup begins by using AWS for their infrastructure, and some large degree, we can thank Amazon for this gift to the startup sector. And on and on -- it's relatively easy to find examples of "big" innovations that add up to huge consumer benefit. Where it gets a little tricker, though, is when you flip the perspective and look at these same big platforms, not from the consumer perspective, but from the supplier perspective. If you're a marketplace seller on amazon, or an uber driver, or an app developer trying to get distribution through the App Store or Facebook, you are keenly aware of the perils of relying on a big platform for distribution (e.g., not "
"). The bigger the platform, the more they can offer you in terms of access to customers, but the more control they can exert, regarding pricing and terms. This is where the tension between big innovation and small innovation lives. What to do about it? It depends. When things become grotesquely anti-competitive and anti-consumer, the government steps in with regulations or antitrust enforcement this is not ideal, but sometimes it's necessary. Alternatively, sometimes there's a market opportunity to serve the supply-side on better terms, as
. What really stands out to me, as I write this, is the tendency for "big" to be great for the demand side, but bad for the supply side. So, where "bottom up" innovation depends on a thriving and diverse supply side of the market (whether that's gig workers, content creators, app developers, or users in a social network contributing their content), we need to be on the lookout for ways to make sure that "big" doesn't get in the way and squelch that. While at the same time, recognizing that "big" can bring lots of direct benefits to consumers.
We've got a few Beam telepresence robots at USV, and use them all the time. Fred has written about them here. We had a team meeting today, and we had two beams going at once -- Fred and I were the first to arrive, and we were chatting beam-to-beam -- he in LAUtah, me in Boston, both of us in NYC by robot:
It works amazingly well. It has now become somewhat normal for robots to be roving around the office, having conversations w people, USV team folks and visitors alike. One idea that keeps coming up is an extensible peripherals API -- the Beam robots already come w a USB port (used for initial setup), and it should be possible to use that to extend it with hardware. We joke about jousting (and have done some), but I could seriously imagine bolting on devices such as additional displays / LCDs, sensors of various kinds, devices that can perform human-like gestures (the way the Kubi can nod, shake and bow), etc. Thinking of Beam as a platform in this way would certainly extend its capabilities (in particular for industry), and would also position Beam in a much stronger position at the center of an ecosystem. Would love to see that happen.
and realized that skating was awesome and hockey was a beautiful sport. So for the past year or so, I've been playing adult rec hockey through an great program here in Boston called
. The thing is, I've never played ice hockey before, and am only a so-so skater (maybe above average for regular people, but way way below hockey quality). So it's been a steep learning curve. What's been so illuminating about it is the combination of how hard it is -- meaning, how unnatural some of the moves are at first -- and how quickly progress does happen with enough practice. I played last night -- my third game of this season -- and realized that while I'm not all the way there yet, I'm much much more comfortable on the ice than I was at the beginning of last year. I'm skating backwards, making hard turns, and just generally keeping good balance most of the time. Reflecting back on the past year, it's really satisfying to feel those changes sink in, and what it's pointed out to me is how much change is accomplished by a series of small steps, rather than a single big bang. This whole process has also been a great exercise in learning online. Turns out that YouTube is full of video tutorials on the minutia of ice skating. For example, check this one out, on "backwards crossovers" (the skill I'm working on right now): It's just so great to be studying something -- whether that's law or chemistry or programming or ice skating -- and be able to benefit from such great resources. It continues to amaze me how much time and effort people will invest in building educational resources online for others. As with a lot of things, the trick here seems to be developing a habit and a routine. Since my son started hockey lessons in November, we've been going skating every Saturday afternoon, and for the past month I've been playing every Wednesday evening. Getting on the ice twice a week, even just for an hour, has done so much to develop my feel for skating. This is true for lots of other things, and has been a great reminder to me how much routine and patience matter when building any new skill or habit. Finally, I've been thinking a lot lately about my Uncle Gerry who passed away over Christmas. He's the one I credit with teaching me to love winter sports, skiing and skating included. He was 87, and in his day, was a monster hockey player, including an
. Here's a picture of Gerry on the ice during his youth:
So perhaps part of why I've been so into this lately is the way that Gerry was fading, while my own son was growing up. And part of it was wanting to get that feeling into my legs that I know he knew and loved. It's been a fun journey and I'm hoping I can keep the practice going.
Theo
at hockey practice a few weeks ago. At a certain point along the way, I
and realized that skating was awesome and hockey was a beautiful sport. So for the past year or so, I've been playing adult rec hockey through an great program here in Boston called
. The thing is, I've never played ice hockey before, and am only a so-so skater (maybe above average for regular people, but way way below hockey quality). So it's been a steep learning curve. What's been so illuminating about it is the combination of how hard it is -- meaning, how unnatural some of the moves are at first -- and how quickly progress does happen with enough practice. I played last night -- my third game of this season -- and realized that while I'm not all the way there yet, I'm much much more comfortable on the ice than I was at the beginning of last year. I'm skating backwards, making hard turns, and just generally keeping good balance most of the time. Reflecting back on the past year, it's really satisfying to feel those changes sink in, and what it's pointed out to me is how much change is accomplished by a series of small steps, rather than a single big bang. This whole process has also been a great exercise in learning online. Turns out that YouTube is full of video tutorials on the minutia of ice skating. For example, check this one out, on "backwards crossovers" (the skill I'm working on right now): It's just so great to be studying something -- whether that's law or chemistry or programming or ice skating -- and be able to benefit from such great resources. It continues to amaze me how much time and effort people will invest in building educational resources online for others. As with a lot of things, the trick here seems to be developing a habit and a routine. Since my son started hockey lessons in November, we've been going skating every Saturday afternoon, and for the past month I've been playing every Wednesday evening. Getting on the ice twice a week, even just for an hour, has done so much to develop my feel for skating. This is true for lots of other things, and has been a great reminder to me how much routine and patience matter when building any new skill or habit. Finally, I've been thinking a lot lately about my Uncle Gerry who passed away over Christmas. He's the one I credit with teaching me to love winter sports, skiing and skating included. He was 87, and in his day, was a monster hockey player, including an
. Here's a picture of Gerry on the ice during his youth:
So perhaps part of why I've been so into this lately is the way that Gerry was fading, while my own son was growing up. And part of it was wanting to get that feeling into my legs that I know he knew and loved. It's been a fun journey and I'm hoping I can keep the practice going.
