I've already "shown how it's done"
in technology many times for US
national security, in US business,
and in research for US national
security and business.

The US DoD, DARPA, NSF, and NIH
have long shown the world
"how it's done", in total
for 70+ years.

The simplest arithmetic shows that
US information technology (IT)
venture capital (VC)
is not a very good business
compared with consumer Internet:
That is, a US IT VC firm might
get up to assets under management
of $5 billion or so, but the
founders of Google, Facebook, and
more have more than that in their
personal net worth.

One problem with VC is, even if
they decide to take their e-mail
seriously, really the best they
can do is just from what arrives in their
e-mail, and far from VC there are
some serious obstacles here:
First, a standard assumption is that,
since computers are to be used
in the work (they likely do remain
the great largely unexploited
opportunity), the assumption is that
computer science is the best
academic background. Well, that
assumption is false; if want to
be quite serious about the work,
then that assumption is badly false.
Second, for really good results, it will
be necessary for some good people
with good academic backgrounds
in crucial fields and topics outside
of computer science to pursue
entrepreneurship, and so far the
appropriate US academic culture
discourages this.

For this assumption, the US DoD
knows that it is largely false and, thus,
concentrates on pure and applied
mathematics, mathematical and
applied physics, and some
relatively mathematical topics
in electronic and other parts of engineering.
The DoD makes very heavy use of computing
but not so much of computer science.

So, for good results in VC, it will
be necessary to catch up with the
DoD and get good people with the
'right stuff' from academic fields
other than computer science, and
that catch up effort will be difficult.

Really, for good projects, the
situation is much better on the
entrepreneur's side of the table
because there one can cook up
terrific stuff instead of just
waiting for it to arrive via e-mail.

My point that VCs and A16Z ignore
their e-mail really was well supported
by your statement that
e-mail is about the worst way to
contact a VC partner. Okay,
the VC partners don't want to
take e-mail seriously. Bizarre,
but true, and so be it.

For the project in question,
once it gets enough 'traction'
to be of interest to a VC,
the revenue will be way past
when the project would accept
equity funding. E.g., one VC
responded that they wanted to
see 100,000 unique visitors a
month before investing. Okay,
but for the project in question
that would be about $40,000
a month in revenue from
a server with $1500 in parts and
an Internet connection costing
about $100 a month. With
the $40,000 a month, VC
equity funding, a C-corp with
VCs on the Board, etc. would be
about as welcome as a skunk at
a garden party.

One big reason: For the project
in question with its technology
the VCs can't evaluate, there
will be more such work to do,
less important than the work done
already but, still, very much worth
doing. But, of course, the Board
would have to approve the organization
and budgets for such work. Tilt!
A Board of VCs would not be able to
do such work because they would not
be able to understand the project
they were being asked to approve.
So, such a Board would a hole in the
bottom of the boat of the company.

The current A16Z Web site mentions
that the number of VC firms has been
shrinking. Since they refused to
read their e-mail, easy to believe.

Darwin has a lot of work to do and, thus,
is a very busy guy; still Sand Hill Road
and Winter Street are due for
a visit from Charles just any day now.
Likely what will be left are firms
willing to read e-mail and evaluate
projects with new, advanced, powerful,
valuable technology that is the
crucial core of a valuable business.
In the meanwhile, entrepreneurs should
concentrate on some good research for
some good projects that can be
brought to market and significant
revenue with, say, a server from
$1500 in parts and an ordinary
Internet connection. The research
is the crucial part.

Sure, VCs won't invest in projects
based on research, not even if the
research is already in production
quality code. But think of the flip side:
For such a project, VCs won't invest
in any competition, either!