In my Twitter feed today, I caught a link from Robert Grevey and quickly made too much of it.
Here’s the direct link to single-page view. My replies:
I tried to find the buried lede that would best summarize this proto-Soviet adventure. The most telling line:
…the new city was conceived by what is called the Commission on Modernization
At least the Times wasn’t credulous enough to swallow the party line, but they failed to provide the necessary context. Perhaps rightly believing it to be obvious and reducing my invective below to irrelevancy.
Soviet innovation wouldn’t have existed without the KGB assisting in the reverse-engineering of Western technology (casually mentioned American equipment mysteriously appearing on scientists’ desks, completed plans emerging from the ether), or the lower ethical standards of Soviet science and its willingness to sacrifice human life. That’s no aspersion on the scientsists themselves, but rather on the flaws of Soviet isolationism, both on a national scale and in the microcosms of research cities.
They crushed Georgian innovation, marginalized, murdered and exiled the Jews (do I even need to cite references for this?), and emerged a Dutch disease blighted autocracy with atavistic delusisons of empire, dissipating and depopulating itself with drink at a rate matching the casualties of the Great Patriotic War.
The Times continues:
For nationalistic Russian officials, it only rubs salt in the wounds that Silicon Valley companies so easily recruit bright Russian scientists. AmBar, the Russian business association, estimates that 30,000 to 60,000 Russian-speaking professionals work in the San Francisco Bay Area.
A marquee name in the high-tech world, the Google co-founder Sergei Brin, immigrated to the United States from Russia with his parents when he was a child. Had Russia been a different place, perhaps Mr. Brin might have started Google there instead of in Silicon Valley.
Mentioning the Jewish Sergey Brin in this context is akin to the Antebellum South lamenting that Frederick Douglass chose to pursue his career elsewhere.
Besides, new ideas in technology emerge from density (the Valley’s suburban distances notwithstanding), amplifying the diversity of thought. They come from people negotiating the spaces between disciplines. They acuminate on interaction with customers and the market. All of these elements are missing in the silo of a research city. Boffins aren’t immune from the reality outside of their village palisades.
With SV innovation focused on disrupting and democratizing media and back-channel connections (the utterly forgettable Fouresquare and Gowalla aside; if anything, they make it easier for the Politburo to keep tabs on those threateningly capricious early adopters), what’s the likelhood of something competitive emerging in a country that makes a habit of assassinating dissidents and journalists?
The only ideas to emerge out of Russia that channel the open spirit of the internet have been Chatroulette, started by a 17-year old in his bedroom, and the black market for stolen credit cards.
What a sad waste of Russian talent, forged in a culture that venerated the engineer, the chess grandmaster, the scientist (but notably, not the intellectual; a necessity for an entrepreneurial culture?).
I’ll conclude with another excerpt from the Times piece:
Skeptics see a deeper strain of Russian tradition: trying to catch up with the West by wielding the power of the state. Looking askance at the incongruous blend of the Kremlin’s will and the openness prized by Silicon Valley, they refer jokingly to the new city as Cupertino-2.
Good luck, Putin Medvedev. I hope the inevitable collapse of this Potemkin village serves as a warning to those who might try it stateside.