Consilient Network· The graph of everyone who built this · Add your entry ↗
Episode · Argument

How a commune kid reached Michael Spence, Larry Sonsini and Kleiner Perkins

Mentorship and access, 1988–2001

Jonathan Hare invented the Quantum Privacy Network and wrote this record. Berkeley 1987, Stanford GSB 1992; founder or principal at Evolve Software, Consilient, Resilient Network Systems and Quantum Privacy LLC. Nine patent filings; the foundational patent granted May 2025 with 2016 priority. This is his account, published with its sources so it can be checked and corrected.
Context1988–2001

How a commune-raised engineer with no capital reached the chief executives of Cisco and BP, the top technology lawyer in Silicon Valley, and a founding partner of Kleiner Perkins.

Vice ChairmanMichael SpenceNobel laureate for market signaling, and — as Vice Chairman of Consilient — a live instance of his own theory.
CounselLarry SonsiniOf Wilson Sonsini, which represented roughly seventy percent of the valley's technology companies. He mentored about one entrepreneur a year.
FriendFrank CaufieldA founding named partner of Kleiner Perkins, and the route to John Doerr and almost anyone else.
How Jonathan Hare is connected to this

Hare had no capital, no family standing in technology, and a childhood on a commune. What he had instead was a small number of people with reputation to spend who chose to spend it on him.

He is aware this is the mechanism the architecture exists to democratize. Michael Spence took the Vice Chairman title at Consilient and opened Cisco and BP. Larry Sonsini mentored one young entrepreneur a year and Hare was one of them. Frank Caufield emailed from an AOL address and could reach anyone.

Inverted Spence signaling is a direct attempt to make what those men did for him available to people who do not happen to know a Nobel laureate. It is not a rejection of the favor. It is an attempt to industrialize it.

Why it is in this record

The Catalyst Network exists because this mechanism works and almost nobody has access to it. Inverted Spence signaling is an attempt to make what these people did for Hare available to people who do not happen to know a Nobel laureate.

The claim

Access in Silicon Valley is usually described as networking. What actually happened here was narrower and more interesting: a small number of people with reputation to lose chose to spend it, publicly, on someone with none. That is costly signaling operating exactly as the theory says — and one of the people doing it had won the Nobel Prize for the theory.

In his own words → S-029
L1 · SummaryThe graphRapid understanding — third person, forwardable
L2 · EpisodeThe storyYou are here — his story, in his voice
L3 · SourceIn his own wordsThe verbatim account — immutable, with its research context

The trail exists so that people who were there can reconstruct their own memories, recognize what they helped incubate, and add to or correct the record — or forward the few pages that belong to someone they know.

In short
01

Spence took Vice Chairman rather than Chairman deliberately, leaving the chair open in case the silver bullet was used.

02

He was deployed as endorsement rather than as principal, because he was not a credible entrepreneur — which is precisely what made the signal credible.

03

What these people spent was reputation, which is the only currency that cannot be faked because spending it costs the spender.

04

The architecture's answer is to make participation nearly costless, so what is revealed is what a contribution caused rather than who could afford to vouch.

Developed

How it happened

01

Spence as the signal

Michael Spence was Oak Hill's trophy: a Nobel laureate and former dean of Stanford GSB who had seen everyone who ever founded a company in the valley.

He took Vice Chairman rather than Chairman, deliberately — so the chair stayed open if the silver bullet were ever used. And he was better deployed as endorsement than as principal: he was not a credible entrepreneur or technologist, so putting him in the chair would have signaled the wrong thing entirely.

I was the star; Spence was the cheering section. That is Spence signaling, with Spence as the signal — a costly, credible endorsement that works precisely because the endorser has reputation at risk and no operating claim to make. He understood the arrangement perfectly. These people understood the mathematics of it.

02

Sonsini, and the one a year

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati represented roughly seventy percent of the technology companies in the valley. Larry Sonsini took on approximately one young entrepreneur a year to mentor. Ken Rudin had been one, and made the introduction.

You got thirty minutes.

03

Caufield, and the dinner

Frank Caufield — a founding named partner of Kleiner Perkins, Stanford GSB in the 1970s, which is how he knew Spence. I made the reservation; when Caufield arrived the concierge became flustered and moved us to a better table. Caufield waved it off. He was an enormous tipper; I tipped twenty percent like a normal person.

He was on AOL's board and emailed from his AOL address, and through him I could reach anyone — including John Doerr. He came close to investing a million dollars personally, and later explained why he did not:

Everything I ever sold, I'd have made more money holding. And my biggest problem is how to spend all my money before I die — so I really shouldn't be investing in future internet stuff. And then: you're like Steve Jobs. You almost got me to invest, and I don't invest in anything.

04

What it was not

None of this was transactional. Sonsini took one entrepreneur a year. Caufield was retired and declining everyone. Spence took a title beneath his standing. Wolfson and Scholes said publicly that I was the best student they had seen in forty years, and repeated it.

What they were spending was reputation, which is the only currency that cannot be faked, and which is worth something precisely because spending it costs the spender.

Restated

What it comes to

The architecture's answer to this is inverted Spence signaling: make participation nearly costless, so that what is revealed is not the capacity to bear a cost but what a contribution actually caused. That is not a rejection of what these people did for him. It is an attempt to make it available to everyone who does not happen to have a Nobel laureate willing to vouch — because the mechanism worked, and almost nobody has access to it.

Connected

Where this sits

Episodes are building blocks. The same material appears in more than one where it belongs in more than one, and every claim traces back to a primary source.

asymmetric informationsignalingmentorshipreputation
Share this
The architecture

What this episode bears on

The record and the architecture are not separate arguments. Each of these mechanisms exists because of something in this episode, and each is what the episode turned out to require.

How it actually works

Into the explainers

The episode is the story. The explainers are the mechanism — what problem it solves, how, and where it would fail.

Keep going

Continue the thread

← PreviousAll episodes
+ Add to the record