Although the HBR article bemoans the lack of "big ideas" I think it makes the fatal mistake of focusing on Valley-centric ideas. Certainly there are still some big, Google-level ideas out there to be had, but there are other industries out there in which big idea can, should, and must form for us to advance as a civilization.
Map the human genome or build the next Farmville?
Find a way to grow food 300% more efficiently to meet the growing demands of the world population or make an iPhone app?
Why must everything be internet-based and somehow have to best Google?
Additionally, I think the author is having trouble filtering out the so called "noise" from the signal. I, for one, think it's terrific that a whole new class of small or "mom and pop" businesses can now exist on the Internet. Does that give us huge advancements as a species? Usually not, but hopefully it's paying their rent, which is great for them.
Yes, we need big ideas to move forward, but don't begrudge the next generation of Internet-based small businesses. The people starting these business are probably NOT the same people who would come up with the earth-changing idea that the author so desperately wants. And if you are one of those select few, then please, stay hungry and stay foolish.
The author actually states these "mom and pop" startups are good for the economy and for the people founding them:
These founders don't want to change to world. They just want to make enough money to provide for their family, buy a car, or earn their freedom. These people are the information economy's mom and pop business owners, just more technologically leveraged and profitable than their brick & mortar predecessors. Instead of starting restaurants and hairdressers they build coupon apps that are used by thousands of restaurants and hairdressers.
This is not a bad thing for the startup ecosystem or the economy. Quite the contrary. It means instead of only having companies at the fat head, there are tens of thousands of smaller companies fulfilling demand along the long tail. And sometimes they may even find the niche was much bigger than they thought. Ever thought air mattresses in living rooms would grow into a billion dollar company that would take on the vacation rental market and the hotel industry? I know many smart investors didn't.
The human genome mapping problem actually has no shortage of companies working on it. It's a big sector which has moved very fast, and its press is probably why it comes to mind.
As for feeding the world, this is something which valley internet-model startups just don't have much power over. It isn't even just a problem of production. You would need all kinds of control of poor post-colonial countries in order to do anything very significant about it. Even if you succeeded wildly, without development there will be a lot more people, they will all need other things like medical care which are now even more scarce, and in the end you will need even more food.
Once upon a time there WERE startups in charge of such things - for example, the Dutch East India Company... the development of civilization was one of the fundamental justifications for colonialism.
If you can make money on some kind of incubator for farmers near places with hunger problems and somehow make sure that the food gets to the poor who have no money to pay for it, then there are many government and NGO aid agencies which would like to talk to you. But it's not exactly a traditional startup thing so it is probably not going to appear on the HN radar.
Also, ideas like "feeding the world" don't fire the "make lots of money before the fund term ends" neurons for VCs. =/ Execution is long and painful on a real world problem like that.
I spent my entire college career finding these ideas and I believe they will be profitable to anyone who may adopt them, and more importantly, massively humanitarian & singularitarian.
Those people doing "trivial" startups are learning important operational skills. Later on, they might go on to do greater things. It's a levelling-up process...
Map the human genome or build the next Farmville?
Find a way to grow food 300% more efficiently to meet the growing demands of the world population or make an iPhone app?
Why must everything be internet-based and somehow have to best Google?
Additionally, I think the author is having trouble filtering out the so called "noise" from the signal. I, for one, think it's terrific that a whole new class of small or "mom and pop" businesses can now exist on the Internet. Does that give us huge advancements as a species? Usually not, but hopefully it's paying their rent, which is great for them.
Yes, we need big ideas to move forward, but don't begrudge the next generation of Internet-based small businesses. The people starting these business are probably NOT the same people who would come up with the earth-changing idea that the author so desperately wants. And if you are one of those select few, then please, stay hungry and stay foolish.