71–80 of 150 posts
definitely marketing. they tried so hard to hype clubhouse. i think the experiment was to see if they could birth stars out of nothing only to learn it does not work that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never heard of it, but I just had a quick skim through and IMHO the bad parts are the parts that have anything to do with economics, because it exposes him as a totalitarian neofeudalist (although he might not think of himself that way ... most totalitarian neofeudalists don't, they just don't understand their own economics well enough to see where it leads).
how totalitarian? you have free markets (which the manifesto supports) or planned economies and planned economies are where totalitarianism works.
Do small players in the US economy have equal access to the market, or are they overshadowed by near oligarchies?
Are you always so bicameral?
Not all of them are marketing. Some of them expose his belief system. After “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” it’s very hard for me to take him seriously again.
They were and remain big crypto investors and it's pretty weird that the essay doesn't acknowledge how much talent and money crypto sucked up. He asks where the supersonic aircraft are and - ignoring that they have awful externalities - there is actually a supersonic jet startup. A16Z hasn't invested in Boom, though, near as I can tell.
A16Z is a leading venture fund - if anyone's gonna build the future, they could use A16Z's money. So why is so much of what Andreesen wants from the future not what they've invested in?
Highly related: https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
Most "news" in the tech industry is funded by VCs, if you follow the money. It's not a terrible fact, but it's one to be aware of. All the `"X Technology" [that Y VC firm has recently raised $4Bn of capital to chase, cough cough] has massive potential to upend [big industry], here's why` articles are compensated-for boosterism. There's still signal in there, although it's mostly in the meta-facts of what they choose…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how totalitarian? you have free markets (which the manifesto supports) or planned economies and planned economies are where totalitarianism works.
Is the US as it operates today a free market (how free?) or a weighted control economy where the larger players have a greater weight of control of media and the political landscape via owned outlets and subsidised senators? Do small players in the US economy have equal access to the market, or are they overshadowed by near oligarchies? Are you always so bicameral?
as far as control of media, traditional media is becoming increasingly irrelevant and when free speech is allowed on social media the economy becomes more free.
and small players seem to disrupt all the time. openai being the most obvious recent example. twitch being another notable example before that.
i usually don't respond to distracting personal questions, but your use of bicameral confused me a little. did you mean to say binary?