Two of the four (MAGA) companies are Seattle-based. Yet Seattle has never developed the startup ecosystem flywheel like SV. Why do you think that is?

You could point to things like more VCs in SFBA, plus better universities like Stanford. Also a longer, deeper history: HP, Shockley/Fairchild, Intel, etc.

My personal experience: Seattle did not have an intense, ambitious culture. Too laid back, not enough risk-taking.

Founder, The Roots of Progress (rootsofprogress.org). I write about the history of technology and the philosophy of progress. Former tech founder.

In SF/SV, when early employees leave a big success, they go on to found their own startups. In Seattle, they retire.

(Context: I lived in Seattle 2004–09, including some time at Amazon, then moved to SFBA and have been here since)

Another take on this is just that there tends to be a power-law type distribution on communities like this because the top cities attract the best talent, in a reinforcing cycle. So you're going to end up with the number one city standing head and shoulders above the rest