Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The techlash that never happened

eriktorenberg.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: The techlash that never happened

#41

Post by ghaff »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #35
Zetice wrote: post #31

Just off the top, I'm seeing a common logical misfire here, specifically: > If you asked the average American on the street about tech, they would tell you they like to use products like Airbnb, DoorDash, Uber, Facebook, Amazon, and many other supposedly maligned companies. It's actually a bit of a giveaway when you say "on the street". Most Americans aren't on the street at all. I dunno what the quality of this sour…

> Even Uber, which according to the same random well-SEO'd source, has 93 million monthly platform consumers[1], which means only 28% of Americans use Uber. Looking at month to month stats like this seems like a poor proxy for "likeable". Something like Uber tends to have a core set of heavy users with a long tail of more infrequent users. I and most people I know use Uber every few months and often in spurts e.g. I…

My usage probably breaks into use it pretty much daily or at least close, use it/consider using it in spurts, and basically never use it. I suspect my never use it (or at least once in a blue moon) bucket would make me seem like an alien in some demographics.

Uber/Lyft is probably my main thing in the middle bucket. I mostly only use on fairly occasional trips by plane and not frequently even then.

Re: The techlash that never happened

#42

Post by Zetice »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #35
Zetice wrote: post #31

Just off the top, I'm seeing a common logical misfire here, specifically: > If you asked the average American on the street about tech, they would tell you they like to use products like Airbnb, DoorDash, Uber, Facebook, Amazon, and many other supposedly maligned companies. It's actually a bit of a giveaway when you say "on the street". Most Americans aren't on the street at all. I dunno what the quality of this sour…

> Even Uber, which according to the same random well-SEO'd source, has 93 million monthly platform consumers[1], which means only 28% of Americans use Uber. Looking at month to month stats like this seems like a poor proxy for "likeable". Something like Uber tends to have a core set of heavy users with a long tail of more infrequent users. I and most people I know use Uber every few months and often in spurts e.g. I…

For sure, but I think the point stands. 93 million is a huge number, but it's not even a third of "Americans".

I don't think there's any measurement you could use that would show Uber used by even half of Americans.

Re: The techlash that never happened

#43

Post by rcpt »

comeonbro wrote: post #28
rcpt wrote: post #15

wrt to the NYT specifically, it was an intentional top down decision https://twitter.com/KelseyTuoc/status/1588231892792328192 Context: https://web.archive.org/web/20221104205605/https://twitter.c...

I'm surprised that the article didn't mention this, given the company the author apparently keeps I would have thought he'd have been among the criminally few people who witnessed and is aware of it, and it's both narratively aligned and the single most important piece of background information.

I left a comment on his post (I think, substack commenting is a bit confusing)

Re: The techlash that never happened

#44

Post by cavisne »

Zetice wrote: post #31

Just off the top, I'm seeing a common logical misfire here, specifically: > If you asked the average American on the street about tech, they would tell you they like to use products like Airbnb, DoorDash, Uber, Facebook, Amazon, and many other supposedly maligned companies. It's actually a bit of a giveaway when you say "on the street". Most Americans aren't on the street at all. I dunno what the quality of this sour…

The Uber example seems like a stretch. If 28% of america uses it monthly, its probably comfortably a majority when you stretch to yearly (ie airport trips). Especially if you extend it to include Lyft.

Rideshare has comfortably replaced taxis, likewise Doordash + competitors have comfortably replaced the alternative (which for most of the country was pizza delivery).

Re: The techlash that never happened

#45

Post by tacticalturtle »

rcpt wrote: post #15

wrt to the NYT specifically, it was an intentional top down decision https://twitter.com/KelseyTuoc/status/1588231892792328192 Context: https://web.archive.org/web/20221104205605/https://twitter.c...

Does anyone know why the original tweet was deleted by Matthew Yglesias?

From some cursory searches, I haven’t been able to find a specific reason like a retraction, and it doesn’t look like he did a general wipe of his history around 2022.

Re: The techlash that never happened

#46

Post by karaterobot »

I think I generally agree that the media often reports on its own feelings as though they represented the vox populi, when they don't. We all make that attribution error, but (good) journalists are expected to be more aware of it.

Another thing I think is generally true is that, even if people hate tech, ultimately tech is just giving them what they want. Nothing will change until what people want changes, and any hypothetical Techlash would be mostly performative in practice: bad publicity without real consequences.

Re: The techlash that never happened

#47

Post by Zetice »

cavisne wrote: post #44
Zetice wrote: post #31

Just off the top, I'm seeing a common logical misfire here, specifically: > If you asked the average American on the street about tech, they would tell you they like to use products like Airbnb, DoorDash, Uber, Facebook, Amazon, and many other supposedly maligned companies. It's actually a bit of a giveaway when you say "on the street". Most Americans aren't on the street at all. I dunno what the quality of this sour…

The Uber example seems like a stretch. If 28% of america uses it monthly, its probably comfortably a majority when you stretch to yearly (ie airport trips). Especially if you extend it to include Lyft. Rideshare has comfortably replaced taxis, likewise Doordash + competitors have comfortably replaced the alternative (which for most of the country was pizza delivery).

I don't think you can say with any certainty at all that "comfortably a majority" of Americans use Uber, especially given that relatively paltry 28% monthly. I understand some people use Uber infrequently, but I think you'll need something more substantial than anecdote to demonstrate that moves the needle more than a percentage or two overall.

Re: The techlash that never happened

#49

Post by eastbound »

repsilat wrote: post #22
ojbyrne wrote: post #7

The top graph (Gallup 2017 Business & Industry Ranking Net Positive Scores) is 6 years old. 2022 results can be found here: https://news.gallup.com/poll/12748/business-industry-sector-... Computer Industry is now 3rd and the Net Positive has gone from 67 to 35. Internet Industry has gone from 5th to the bottom half of the list and the Net Positive has gone from 41 to -2. Perhaps the Techlash was just a little late.

> just a little late It fits with the article's explanation really. The media hate tech, propagandize against it, and they eventually win people over.

What if the media represented a single large family of traditional wealth, while the tech were the new rich, and the media tries to dampen the tame of the new rich so that they can keep their dominance in the long term?

Re: The techlash that never happened

#50

Post by rqtwteye »

hgsgm wrote: post #39
bitwize wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a more-than-two-party system would require restructuring the Constitution entirely. So let's do it. Start with South Africa's constitution as a model.

As soon as elected officials agree, it will happen. 99% of aaod officiala are in one of the 2 major parties. Unless non elected-officials win a revolution.

They live very comfortable lives with the current two party system. If we had one party only they would have to take responsibility for what’s happening. With a two party system you always have the other side to blame. With more than two parties you start losing power. The current system is just perfect for putting on a good show for the plebes to keep them fighting each other while the powerful pull the strings in their own favor.
Post reply on HN