That's a counterfactual. Yeah, maybe Shockley's project happened elsewhere it Silicon Elsewhere could have happened somewhere else. But it didn't happen elsewhere. But you are assuming that it would have catalyzed elsewhere. For example, it could have catalyzed in Murray Hill, New Jersey after the transistor but it didn't.
Anyways, people are always leaving the Bay Area. If you came here five years ago, first you were new here and second, you've known people who have left.
So Keith Rabois left for Miami. Great for him. The question is whether the next Keith Rabois will spring forth from Miami. Unlikely.
It is interesting how you can gloss over the signifcance of the inventor of the transistor moving to the bay area, and then use the example how his former laboratory in New Jersey failed to commercialize the transistor as an example of how Silicon Valley is uniquely situated to allow innovation to happen.
A much more reasonable interpretation is that Shockley was going succeed no matter where he went, not that Silicon Valley is uniquely situated, especially with the dominance of east coast companies in defense contracting.
When Shockley moved west in 1956, Stanford Research Park was already 3 years old. Its defense roots predate even that. Shockley wasn't moving to a technological wasteland.
Anyways, people are always leaving the Bay Area. If you came here five years ago, first you were new here and second, you've known people who have left.
So Keith Rabois left for Miami. Great for him. The question is whether the next Keith Rabois will spring forth from Miami. Unlikely.