I actually don't know how to program but I really wanted to get a more neutral but detailed information on how much work it takes before reaching the promised land for local third world developers/start-ups.
As one commentor used as an example:
"So many times have I heard people here look down on pinoy artists and game developers and look up to Korean artists and game developers, but the irony here is that A LOT OF PINOY ARTISTS AND DEVELOPERS ARE WORKING FOR KOREAN GAME COMPANIES."
I hope you don't mind me morphing this issue into a tech-related subject. Aside from Reddit, HN and Metafilter are the only two other major social media sites I know of that are well known for their quality comments. I failed to generate Reddit's interests and I don't have a MetaFilter account and this is the last place I have of asking aside from local sites, many of whom I'm not familiar of and many more who might not have as grand a knowledge as to the pros and cons and history of the web 2.0 boom as a global audience.
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/e9jmo/could_the_philippines_seriously_have_become_the/
2. Start the change locally. Do a startup, try to hire people. Try to organize a small group of developers/hackers, bring books about programming (e.g. SICP), make them available and easily reachable, maybe translate them to your local language.
If the Japanese where trying to do mimic Disney exactly, there wouldn't have been Anime, and they wouldn't have caught up with Disney either.
Actually now that I think about it, studying the history of Japanese Anime might be very useful.
Unfortunately for us here, this isn't quite the case from my little observation of our culture. Even start-ups work on a corporate mindset. Just a few days ago, I spotted someone selling a DVD of Ubuntu for higher than the average price of pirated DVDs. This doesn't even take into account the difficulty of establishing meet-ups here.
I apologize if these just sound like excuses. I'm just trying to put the problem into context from my perspective in case this allows for a better explanation of what type of non-government development that can be done to turn this concept into a reality.
Something that might help: Myers-Briggs personality indicator. SJ types tend to work on a corporate mind-set. Try to find NT or NF types; they might start with a corporate mindset (assuming that's the prevailing mindset around them) but they can easily change and adapt more lean strategies.
Actually, let me know how things go for you. I kinda wish I could do the same in my country.
Regarding Anime: I've heard that the father of Anime was greatly inspired by Disney. It would've been real easy to slip into a "let's try to clone Disney" mindset when you're in that position. It sure helped that the Japanese had manga before, so they had something of their own to build on, instead of just following another culture's model.
That's why I think it's best to just start with a small group of programmers, to build a solid base that could later grow into something bigger.
In Raghuram Rajam's book (Fault Lines) there is something about half of what a country needs to develop is capital, and part is the human organization that can turn this capital into development. As in sane institutions and sane business procedures and people. I would say such a thing is mostly lacking in Brazil, for example: We do have lots of very very intelligent, educated people but it is not critical mass --- also, it is not enough to be seen by society as a driver of lifestyle enhancement (or something like it).
It's easy to see how Americans can buy more Snickers with their salaries and assume that their society is better, but technology has changed all the rules, maybe it changed the rule that "more money is better" too.
Which also turns out to be a derisive doubt: In wanting to "make a Philippine Silicon Valley" are you not really trying to get a better pay for the same job you currently get?" It is a totally valid goal, mind you, but also a goal that means you lack a socially contextual mode of analysis.
So i would say: Be very good at what you do, and then do something with it.
Which in turn means: I only think a "Silicon Valley" thing can happen with real people doing things that they are personally enthusiastic about. Like Woz was enthusiastic about circuits, or Leonardo was enthusiastic about anatomy... and in turn those created a context whereby everyone could see how (not only believe, but see how) this kind of activity could translate in better lives for themselves.
I guess i did digress some...
I do understand the context of your question but it's kind of a weird thing for me to answer. For you see, I don't have an "official" employed job currently and if I were to be given a choice of what to have - I would certainly choose one that is more of a freelance type of job than a static monthly salary type of task.
In that sense, it really feels weird trying to justify my "non-existant job" as a desire for better pay and one based on a socially contextual mode of analysis.
Although here I may be misunderstanding you too. What exactly is a socially contextual mode of analysis in a country who's majority core socially contextual mode of analysis as far as job goes is to lift themselves up from poverty and just have a stable life they can live on? Even if we would set aside start-ups and include those who would say analyze this with goals not relating to better pay, what is their incentive to not merely jump ship? ...and if they were to not jump ship, would they have goals to change what sounds impossible and make it not only possible but possible towards a more capitalistic friendly future and entrepreneurial minded culture or...be more of the same?
To your statement (and I do not disagree with your point mind you), I am always reminded by a section of Hamming's You and Your Research article:
"When your vision of what you want to do is what you can do single-handedly, then you should pursue it. The day your vision, what you think needs to be done, is bigger than what you can do single-handedly, then you have to move toward management."
Not that I'm saying mine is bound to have a happy ending like the person which Hamming is retelling but in a world where the likes of Woz or Leonardo are spearheading concepts to new heights, the mediocre may be the ones left to run most of the asylum and the weak (to which I include myself as being part of since I haven't succeeded in any area where I was very good) must decide how and where they would like to pursue themselves to failure. Although just to clarify, I cannot say my pursuit is necessarily Philippine Silicon Valley per se. It's just a question that I modified from my AskReddit topic.
I just meant that the whole culture, you know, the boom-and-sell and become a millionaire, that this just isn't the best thing in the world. That it makes all the sense there but that i think that a real grassroots "technology experimentation mecca" should better develop it's own culture and views about life and machines and stuff --- one better than this American-culture offshoot that i am guessing Silicon Valley is.
So technology is cool, hacking is cool, how does this affect our lives? It seems to me a bit too US-high-school thing that to prove you're cool you have to become a millionaire. Haven't you wondered why the cool guys like Woz depart and the pinpricks like Jobs stay? Too much macho display, i say. We are like Peacoks, instead using our brains as display?
For example, there is this TED talk about this one guy who leaves some internet-linked comps in the middle of nothing in India and then just comes back 6 months later to see what the children did with that, this guy is certainly not making as many millions, but i believe he is nurturing a certain "relationship with technology", and this, to me, is the one thing that is valuable about Silicon Valley.
By "socially contextual mode of analysis" i was trying to express something like "could the old lady living on a shack on the middle of nowhere share your dream of a Philippino Silicon Valley?" Is it possible to share this vision? Not that Old Ladies should code, obviously, but could you make a girl secretary that is likelly to become this old lady in 50 years, could you make her proud to be working for a high-tech fling? Proud enough to stick with you after being offered a better pay?
Could you have girl coders? And could they do it because they like it and not because it is "a right thing to do"? Because, you know, coding is fun.
I am deeply convinced that money is almost never the solution. And that when there is no "solution" to speak of, the simple injection of money will create pain. So what i am saying is that there must be a culture before there is a market, or something like it. That the idea must not be written in dollars, but in expectations and dreams, in enthusiasm, and, finally, in the good-old curious spirited hacking.
That said, have you seen "leadership lessons from dancing guy"? Do read the post too, after you see the video. Really worth your time.
I think it's feasible to create a tech hub there that is a bit more than offsourcing for multinationals, but you'd be looking at attracting a different class of entrepreneur.
Could you also clarify how a wage level which allow for multiple staff with minimal investment/income would work?
On the other hand, it's still quite possible for a Philippines-based startup to generate most of its revenues from wealthier countries.
Silicon Valley is a mecca for entrepreneurs looking for funding to form fast-growing, high-risk companies, and startups that need elite developers to solve challenging technical problems. On the other hand, if you're looking to start a relatively low risk, medium-return business you're less likely to get investment in the Valley and less likely to run out of cash before you start making money in the Philippines.
People also don't seem to have the same level of confidence in themselves here. Kind of hard for me to understand as I am from what is considered the "greatest" country in the world. Hard to imagine what its like for someone growing up in the 3rd world. The only analogy I can draw is perhaps someone coming from a rich family vs someone coming from the ghetto.
I don't think the analogy is quite correct though. At least based only on the movie impressions of ghettos I've seen, I feel it's sort of an interesting ironic antonym of cultural personalities.
If many of the people in your ghetto had the same cultural identity as many of our poor people over here, you'd see a more unified poverty like the one I imagine exists in the Filipino groups in San Francisco. (I haven't been outside of my country except for HK and so I'm only guessing.)
In reverse, if we have more of a ghetto culture, it won't necessarily mean we will lift up ourselves better but certainly we'd be a lot more angrier and violent at the poverty level that in ways may further hurt our very unstable lifestyle but will be better breeding grounds for the type of entrepreneurs that mimic the US lifestyle.
As much as I agree that economic freedom is important, it's not like in hindsight richer countries were able to shrug off corporations and the little guy managed to beat the big guy.
If anything it was merely the allowance afforded by being a richer country and the competitive culture backed by a competitive and often (at the time) unique society/political education movement that created the sort of economic illusion of being free which allowed for the little guys to rise/want to rise.
I am merely stereotyping though and even in my attempts at stereotyping I could be wrong but considering the current state of the world (or mainly America), it just appears to be the correct assumption.
Sure, when you have cheap labor to export, you end up doing a lot of work for other people.
Also, perhaps Koreans are simply better at running gaming companies, regardless of the nationalities of the employees.
As for Silicon Valley, there is only one Silicon Valley.
