世界上潜在的“马斯克”和“扎克伯格”，数量至少是硅谷所认为的 10 倍。 常见的叙事是：进步之所以缓慢，是因为传奇创始人太稀缺了——“要是我们能多几个马斯克、多几个扎克伯格、多几个谢尔盖就好了……”这种说法的潜台词是：这些人稀有到近乎宇宙级别的偶然，我们只能等“闪电再次劈下来”。 我认为这种看法完全、彻底是错的。 马斯克在 PayPal 之前，并不“显然就是马斯克”；扎克伯格也只是一个住在宿舍里的 19 岁少年。这些传奇之所以成为传奇，是因为他们在对的时间、对的环境里，得到了对的支持。 真正的问题不是：“我们到哪里去找更多独角兽创始人？”而是：“我们如何创造条件，让那些非凡的人发现自己有能力去打造一个巨大的事业？” 事实上，硅谷在这件事上做得很好——前提是你已经在这里、已经在网络里、已经“看起来像那种人”。对这些人来说，系统是有效的。只是这个系统太小了。 现在的大多数创业生态，优化的是筛选（selection），而不是培育（cultivation）；是挑选赢家，而不是创造赢家。真正的突破点，不是把“每年选出 10 个最好的创始人”这件事做得更精准，而是把候选池整体扩大 10 倍。 正是基于这种信念，我才参与创办了 SPC。稀缺的不是人类潜力，而是我们对“应该去哪里寻找”的想象力。 There are 10x more potential Elons and Zucks out there than Silicon Valley believes. The common narrative is that progress is rate-limited by a scarcity of legendary founders. "If only we had more Elons, more Zucks, more Sergeys..." Implicit in this is that these founders are so cosmically rare that we're essentially waiting for lightning to strike. I think this is completely, totally wrong. Elon wasn't obviously Elon before PayPal. Zuck was a 19-year-old kid in a dorm room. The legends became legends because they were in the right environment at the right time with the right support. The real question isn't "where do we find more unicorn founders?" It's "how do we create the conditions where exceptional people can discover they're capable of building something massive?" Silicon Valley is actually great at this—if you're already here, already in the network, already look the part. The system works. It's just too small. Most of the ecosystem is optimized for selection, not cultivation. For picking winners, not creating them. The unlock isn't identifying the 10 best founders per year more accurately. It's expanding the pool by 10x. This belief is a core reason I helped start SPC. The scarcity isn't in human potential. It's in our imagination about where to look.