"Efforts to duplicate silicon valley tend to fail because they attempt to follow the valley by looking at where it is now. They don't look at the century of history."<p>The problem is that the solution isn't to endeavor to duplicate Silicon Valley. The solution is to start small, foster communication and collaboration between existing entrepreneurs, encourage and support a research-based creative education from the youngest ages, and to cross-pollinate interested parties with each other. Essentially, to take the lessons learned from SV's history and start cultivating them at the micro level.<p>There are a plethora of options, but in every case the various problem solvers are not self-organized to the extent that is required to make real progress. Consider PG with YC (or any of the other tech incubators). They specialize in matching entrepreneurs with each other and with VCs. That's great. Now consider companies like 3M, IBM, and HP, that all have significant R&D branches. Woohoo, but they're often isolated from the broader community due to IP-loss risks. What about research universities, business schools, or NPO research institutes? They certainly provide value and do great work, but there is often a barrier locking out the business world (except in a few cases, where researchers and professors (and their schools) actively look for entrepreneurs to support in founding either spin-offs or private companies). Finally, what about the -- for lack of a better term -- open source community? The problem here is that "community" is too loose and lack of coordination is the norm. Even in projects that have a charismatic leader who does an excellent job stimulating communication, projects themselves tend toward isolationism.<p>As the author notes, it won't be possible to create another hub innovating at ludicrous speed without looking at the problem organically and starting small.