Ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin
Ted Ullyot recently joined Andreessen Horowitz to head up its first-ever operating group for policy and regulatory affairs. Before joining a16z, Ted was General Counsel at Facebook, joining the company in when it was just people and ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin the legal team through IPO until Prior to Facebook, Ted spent most of his career as a Washington, D.
He grew up in, and now lives in, the Bay Area with his wife and three children ages 13, 11, and 8. When does something NOT surprise you? Being a GC is sort of like being a general contractor on a construction project: Plus, every company has its own distinct issues, and those change all the time.
I thought the idea of a hackathon sounded cool, so the first time we had one after I got to the company, I made a point of taking our entire legal team which at that time was about 10 people to it. But we were present. I thought it was important for the legal department to show respect for the engineering culture ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin the company.
I have a couple of thoughts here. One is, I actually think the situation between Washington and Silicon Valley has gotten much, much better over the years and especially in recent years. The administration has also brought in people who used to work at major internet companies ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin Facebook, Google, and Twitter.
Patent and Trade Office recently opened a satellite location in Silicon Valley. Then, on the campaign side, both Democrats and Republicans have been hiring way more tech folks as well.
People are realizing they need tech not the tech industry, I mean new technologies to win ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin. Before, it would ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin taken years for a specific technology to move outside of early adopters to become a prominent and natural thing among mainstream users. Something like Meerkat can go viral in just one weekend, and a politician might use it in her campaign a week later. If the relationship between government and technology is so much better, then why are all these conflicts between lawmakers and startups taking place?
Is it a violation of privacy? The focus is often on what can go wrong with new technologies, rather than on the benefits of these innovations. In fairness, many of those accounts are true. So then are we really seeing something new here, or is it more of the same? Is this just a difference of degree — or is it a difference of kind? Tech today has accelerators built into it that it never had before: That has speeded things up considerably. As I see it, regulatory capture is really about two things:.
The downside of having to deal with a regulatory agency a lot is that you have to ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin considerable time and resources. But the upside of that continuous contact through meetings and events is you ted ullyot andreessen horowitz and bitcoin to get to know each other, and understand how and why regulators do what they do.
This form of regulatory capture is about knowing how to work the system. You make sure the rooms are safe. When people visit San Francisco, they should have a safe room with a fire escape in the right place. So you should go scrutinize what these new guys are doing. The other kind of regulatory capture is a form of back-scratching, where buddies that legacy incumbents have worked with for years are now in office.
They are running things. Take net neutrality for instance. Assuming the rules stand, the telcos have literally decades of experience navigating the halls, and the rules, of the F. They know exactly what objections to throw at your petition.
First of all you have to be willing to take risks. So you have to be willing to fight. I saw this time and time again at Facebook: No, and this new function is not a lobbying role.
Think about it more as long-term relationship building, in the same way Andreessen Horowitz already manages different networks our startups can access. Like a rising tide that lifts all boats. Our portfolio companies are not the only ones who will benefit from our efforts. How do regulators figure out where fear-mongering ends and legitimate safety issues begin? And how can startups help them? Most regulators are good people trying to do their jobs, which generally speaking is protecting consumers.
In this sense, startups are actually very aligned with the ultimate goals of regulators. This is where something that seems like a disadvantage — having hundreds of regulators — can be an advantage. Google Fiber used this to its advantage to find which cities to start with, for example. If I do my job right, building that network means identifying and getting these relationships in place: I think the FAA has been moving in the right direction here and moving relatively quickly for a federal agency.
Of course, some important issues — like the current debate on defining an employee vs. And I do think the tech sector is more aware and sensitive to socially conscious aspects of their businesses right now. In the past, a lot of employment risk was bundled inside a single company: How about patent reform? Back in the early days of Facebook, we were in the position that a lot of young companies find themselves in: There have been some strides toward patent reform in Congress, but really meaningful patent reform on the legislative front remains difficult given all the competing interests.
As I see it, regulatory capture is really about two things: What should startups do then? If you handle the relationship wrong, your startup might win the battle … but lose the war.