Live data from Hacker News

The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

a16z.com

261–270 of 414 posts

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#261

> Markets prevent monopolies and cartels. A lot of the optimism seems to rely on this statement and...I'm not convinced? But I also admit I'm not well informed on the topic. Does anyone have suggested reading on 'market discipline', as they're calling it? I mean, the first person on their "Patron Saints of Techno-Optimism" is Jeff Bezos, who is actively dealing with an antitrust lawsuit from the FTC regarding Amazon'…

Yeah. If anything, monopolies and cartels spring into being within a free market. Over and over and over again.

They're so dangerous to free markets because they hack the core freedoms into a positive feedback loop. Collusion beats naked competition; it's why our ancestors evolved to form societies instead of eating each other.

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#262

I agree with the overall thrust of this, or should be easy to convince, but boy does this lack of self-awareness just shout “distance yourself and run, don’t walk!” > Our enemy is the ivory tower, the know-it-all credentialed expert worldview, indulging in abstract theories, luxury beliefs, social engineering, disconnected from the real world, delusional, unelected, and unaccountable – playing God with everyone else’…

Academic credentials in the US, especially at the 'prestige' institutions, have been hollowed out quite a lot by politics, groupthink, & logrolling.

Large government subsidies, & a self-replicating nearly-hereditary elite, have insulated much of their output from accountability to the broader society, and even from accountability to the truth.

Even an "uber-wealthy capital allocator" with a big personal-wealth buffer faces sharper feedback from today's concrete & changing reality – losses from mistakes, gains from smart choices – than tenured academics, or bureaucrats with lifelong sinecures.

In the text, he's not arguing from authority, or personal biography – so why would he need to waste any words about his personal particulars? (They're in the public record if you need them as part of your own heuristics.)

He's saying some ideas, & some systems, are better – not ranking people by class. Further, a "manifesto" like this is a resonant call to draw like minds, moreso than any sophisticated apologetic to try to convince doubters. (For that: read the other authors he name-checks.)

To obsess on the speaker's characteristic – their "self-awareness", their tone, their inability to "read the room", their station in life – rather than their words & ideas is a big part of the downbeat but in many places entrenched attitude he's criticizing.

Per Eleanor Roosevelt: "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but boy does this lack of self-awareness just shout “distance yourself and run, don’t walk!” This feels a bit of an extreme reaction to me, I don't try and read into gotchas in writing and use them to "run away". Instead it makes me: 1. View the writing with skepticism 2. Try to understand what Andreessen thinks makes him not one of those ivory tower figures, because I certainly think of him as one. 2 seems the mor…

The “wanting to distance oneself” is an extremely pragmatic reaction: if you believe similar arguments need to be made, you have a legitimate interest in putting forth good versions of those arguments. He has a big platform and this will be portrayed as “the case” for techno-optimism, not to mention the attitude and tone. I’m not really sure what the purpose of publishing something like this is. It doesn’t really see…

> I’m not really sure what the purpose of publishing something like this is

He wants crypto to be cool

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#264

> Markets prevent monopolies and cartels. A lot of the optimism seems to rely on this statement and...I'm not convinced? But I also admit I'm not well informed on the topic. Does anyone have suggested reading on 'market discipline', as they're calling it? I mean, the first person on their "Patron Saints of Techno-Optimism" is Jeff Bezos, who is actively dealing with an antitrust lawsuit from the FTC regarding Amazon'…

Read more closely: Jeff Bezos isn't mentioned. A pseudonymous X account known for gonzo tech/AI optimism, @BasedBeffJezos, is.

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Read the other comments in this thread: HN, like much of west coast tech, has started to fracture along political lines. When I first joined HN many years ago, it was a haven for techno-optimism (not unlike this essay), but has fallen back into being reactive, resistant, cynical, and sanctimonious. I guess that's what happens after too many years of b2b saas paychecks.

I don't think there is anything wrong with B2B SaaS. I think that's a red herring.

From my experience, the conformist attitude we see on display these days comes from FANG salarymen ("salarypeople", the reference to the Japanese cultural concept of "salarymen" is instructive). They have treated tech as nothing more than a fancy bourgeois "career path" -- like high finance in the 80s or big law in the 90s. An inoffensive way to make their parents happy and raise families with a good standard of living. Nothing inherently wrong with this, but it does mean the rebellious streak in the culture begins to fade.

As I remember it, the utopian feeling of tech communities of the early tech culture stemmed from cyberpunks homesteading the noosphere (a la Linus) or engineers-turned-accidental-entrepreneurs (a la Woz). A large part of it was the sheer thrill -- the fun -- of creation. It's not B2B SaaS that drained the fun out, plenty of fun B2B products were built in the post-Linus, post-Woz area. What drained the fun out, instead, is the corporatization of the entire industry via Big Tech.

We all used to complain about IBM/Microsoft in the 90s and 00s, rebelling against their industry dominance via open source (e.g. Linux) or engineering+design (e.g. Apple). Now the same sorts of people work for any number of IBM/Microsoft-sized corporations, exerting IBM/Microsoft-style proprietary control over individual lives, in comfortable salaried roles in the 2020s.

I'm not sure what to make of it, myself. On the one hand, "tech won". Heck, even Linux and Apple won, beyond my wildest imagination in the 90s and 00s. On the other hand, so did conformism and stagnation.

(There were other similar victories, I am just using Linux and Apple as easy illustrative examples from the last couple decades.)

Reminds me of this quote by jwz from way back in 1999. He was writing about Netscape but you could say the same thing about the whole tech industry today:

The company stopped innovating. The company got big, and big companies just aren't creative. There exist counterexamples to this, but in general, great things are accomplished by small groups of people who are driven, who have unity of purpose. The more people involved, the slower and stupider their union is.

And there's another factor involved, which is that you can divide our industry into two kinds of people: those who want to go work for a company to make it successful, and those who want to go work for a successful company. Netscape's early success and rapid growth caused us to stop getting the former and start getting the latter.

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#266

Why does he include "John Galt" in the list of (real) authors to read, but not Ayn Rand? What am I missing? Indeed, in the spirit of Rand using an agreeable term "Objectivism" to label her confused hyperindividualism, A16Z uses the agreeable "Techno-Optimism" to repackage the same. I'm highly optimistic about technology, but not whatever this blog post is about.

The list is labeled "Patron Saints" — only a following sentence mentions "reading their works". Many listed aren't really "authors" at all. And Ayn Rand would have enjoyed having "John Galt" listed in her place, I think. And this post is definitely about technology!

> And Ayn Rand would have enjoyed having "John Galt" listed in her place, I think.

What a bizarre ideology!

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#267

I agree with the overall thrust of this, or should be easy to convince, but boy does this lack of self-awareness just shout “distance yourself and run, don’t walk!” > Our enemy is the ivory tower, the know-it-all credentialed expert worldview, indulging in abstract theories, luxury beliefs, social engineering, disconnected from the real world, delusional, unelected, and unaccountable – playing God with everyone else’…

(a) indulge in abstract theories (b) engage in social engineering (c) disconnect from the real world (d) delude themselves (e) appoint themselves (f) play God with anyone else's life with total insulation from the consequences. That seems to describe developers, and this VC was one, Silicon Valley VC and/or SBF-types. Who the heck even comes close to (f) except Big Tech. With respect to (e), "unelected", does anyone…

>(f) play God with anyone else's life with total insulation from the consequences. [...] Who the heck even comes close to (f) except Big Tech.

Monsanto. Nestle. Enron, Goldman Sachs, the Pinkertons. BP, Chevron, Woodside, Rio Tinto, BHP.

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#268
post #260
post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marc did a podcast chatting about tv shows with fascist and white supremamcist Richard Hanania, so maybe I shouldn't have been as surprised as I was to see that. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/richard-hanania-white-suprema...

This is very troubling, because Hanania is a genuine white supremacist. But it turns out he hid it well, and that HuffPost expose only came out two years after the Andreessen podcast, so it's reasonable to think he didn't know. And on the podcast Andreessen makes a pretty strong criticism of the Right (as well as the left): > And the main principle of the right is that it hates the left. This is the old Buckley thing…

In what way did he hide it well? I’d best describe the story as “racist has a secret life where he’s even more racist”

https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/165754101074508185...

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the capitalist manifesto: why the global free market will save the world pretty crazy they'd put a fallacy in the title of their book

How is it a fallacy? Do you know that it won't?

I think the big criticism with The Capitalist Manifesto is that it was essential the guiding philosophy in the late-1990's to early 2010s where the belief was that building a strong trade with China based on capitalist principles would lead to political change there.

It's impossible to say whether or not it is a fallacy of course, but this is a criticism that does need addressing.

The other major criticism is that it doesn't take into account externalities. It was written in the 1950s, before the birth of the modern environmental movement, but non-the-less the effect of unbound lassize-fair capitalism was understood and the book could do more to address this.

For me (as is common in political/economic trade offs) it's enough to say that the book makes some good points that seem more true than false, and there is enough data to show that it does work much of the time.

Re: The Techno-Optimist Manifesto

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

really well written reply, much I agree with. Except one part about markets. I think even in the Age of Abundance, market forces will still be present. But I think they will be more like how trees grow to the light, or roots to the water. We will still need signals for efficiency and regrowth. Hard to say the same about money. I can't see a world without value, and I can't comprehend a system with value but no means…

In envisioning a future landscape, I see energy—both its generation and consumption—as well as human attention serving as the core currencies of value. These measures transcend the limitations of material wealth, opening avenues for a more holistic understanding of worth. The question of whether this will manifest as a 'market' is less clear, but what is certain is that it would be fundamentally distinct from the sys…

LLMs already radically change the attention economy
Post reply on HN