Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • That was SO GOOD!! It completely speaks to me. However:

      I’m watching the ideologies of our industry collapse. Our celebration of disruption of every other industry, our belief that digital platforms must always uphold free speech no matter how vile.

      I read this on the heels of spending two hours talking with Slate tech reporter April Glaser and listening to her amazing podcast:

      It feels like there is a growing awareness among writers like Paul Ford and April that we're now in the position of being proudshamed of our industry. We still love it, but we made some terrible mistakes along the way we'd love to fix.

    • Yeah, we've took the old 'move fast and break things' way of doing tech as far as it can, or should, go. It's not nerds tinkering in the garage any more, it's corporations wielding power on a planetary scale. A different approach is in order.

    • corporations wielding power on a planetary scale.

      Maybe it's a bit of a devil's advocate thing, but let me offer a different angle - I tend to think that said corporations are increasingly giving the power up to the nation-state. True, corporations have a lot of money and practical influence on the minutiae, but look at the larger trends, and you will see them giving the influence away, submitting to the will of ye olde rigid legal and social systems, many of which are long due for an overhaul (and that was a part of the promise of the "new tech"!)

      I would be the last person to posit that it is easy or simple to overhaul social systems (cue Churchill's line on democracy); however, I don't see much trying in progress, worldwide, and I do see a fair amount of terrifying regress.

    • It's not nerds tinkering in the garage any more, it's corporations wielding power on a planetary scale. A different approach is in order.

      Agreed...those corporations yield the power, simply because...aren't they the entity/entities that brought the investors in to pay for all of this?

    • Each additional year I work in the Silicon Valley, I have come to believe we are blaming the entrepreneurs for their growth-at-all-costs mantra, but I think it's the investors.

      When Facebook's growth slowed, the investors forced Zuckerberg to sell it to Yahoo for $1 billion. It wasn't until Yahoo balked at the deal and Zuck was able to show his investors that he had a mechanism to re-ignite growth that they decided not to sell.

      It wasn't long ago books had titles like Built to Last. The respected companies grew at 20-30% a year, were called blue chip, were admired for building value, for their treatment of workers, and were consistently profitable.

      Now the titles of books are like Blitzscaling, argue that it's the investor power law that rules (only the companies that return 100x matter), and you should risk it all to become a monopoly. The highly valued ones are like Uber that blitzscale and are fraught with problems.