Well put, although I'm not quite sure "optimism" is the right term. Is it optimistic or egotistical for every SV engineer to believe that they are capable of creating a company worth a nine-figure IPO or acquisition - or, alternatively, that they can personally increase an established company's bottom line by a million a year? Somewhere in between, I'd guess. Partly it's overestimation of the market, partly it's overestimation of the self. Either way, it does seem to be a difference between SV and elsewhere. SV entrepreneurs believe they can succeed because it never even occurred to them to believe otherwise and of course nobody else would suggest such a thing. Entrepreneurs elsewhere are generally more aware of doubts and concerns, but consciously intend to prove the nay-sayers wrong.
Is one approach or mindset better than the other? It's tempting to say that the financial success of SV validates that approach, but I don't think that success occurs in a vacuum. Could those SV companies get where they are without past contributions from MIT or Bell Labs, current ones from Austin or Seattle? I don't think so. An army needs more than one kind of soldier, an industry needs more than one kind of company, and just because SV seems to hog all the glamour doesn't mean other places are somehow lacking.
Is one approach or mindset better than the other? It's tempting to say that the financial success of SV validates that approach, but I don't think that success occurs in a vacuum. Could those SV companies get where they are without past contributions from MIT or Bell Labs, current ones from Austin or Seattle? I don't think so. An army needs more than one kind of soldier, an industry needs more than one kind of company, and just because SV seems to hog all the glamour doesn't mean other places are somehow lacking.