Post

clearly the big lesson from the last election was that people were too mean to giant amoral technology corporations

256 reposts1.6K likes

This idea of deciding which side you are on because of the way you are treated by or the quality of the people in that ‘side’ has to STOP. You support something or someone because you believe in the policies or ideologies. Anything else is best left to sports and entertainment. So inane.

Google stopped being interesting or moral sometime around 2008. Facebook was never a progressive ally. Netflix stomped all over net neutrality the second it was financially convenient. Andreesen's entire premise is a fiction.

They're mad because Lina Khan got people talking about antitrust reform seriously for the first time in fifty fucking years and the brunchlords like andreesen can't be having that

Besides, all the major players in the industry became older, more experienced, more cynical, and significantly richer during the last decade. “Tech world is progressive” was an Obama-era stereotype, not a historical constant

Silicon Valley was only an ally insofar as they were startups Obama was signing continuous subsidies too. Now that they're established megacorps, Republican economics magically works better for them.

whatever happens it's important to glean the absolutely wrong lessons from everything, constantly, then leverage that ignorance for widespread public attention and applomb

Yep. They’re helpless children so as the adults in the room we must always be the bigger person. Fuck that shit. I resigned my role as family caretaker and I ain’t gonna take on millions of crybaby overgrown toddlers.

In relative terms, considering that they are still corporations that need to make profits for stakeholders and not NGOs, I would argue that corporations like Microsoft and Google were more open to progressive ideas than, say, Goldman Sachs or Cargill

There was a brief window during the Obama era where these companies briefly pretended to care about diversity and progressive ideals but given how quickly they kissed the ring of the complete decimation of democracy you can see in real time what that was worth

Trump and his team is the worst ever seen, but I still think that it’s not going to be totally catastrophic. Reality is a good constraining force, one thing is bullshitting in a campaign, another is dealing with the real world and its constraints. Let’s be optimistic here

Andreessen’s ridiculousness is astounding. Big Tech is mostly dressed up information gathering advertising agencies tuned to engagement, not values, as engagement = profit. And treating Big Tech as a monolith is stupid. Is Apple conservative? Is Microsoft? No, bc unlike VCs they play the long game!

They got billions of OUR tax money in subsidies, grants, and tax breaks👇 They operated without any oversight because they were 'innovating.' They bought presidency with OUR money, and now they are complaining that we are not nice to them 🤷🏼‍♀️ www.latimes.com/business/la-...

latimes.comElon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidiesLos Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space.

Oh no. We still thought they should be regulated and pay their taxes and not intentionally poison the public discourse for the sake of clicks. We’re so mean you guys. Why aren’t we giving them the Standard Oil pre-antitrust treatment they so clearly deserve! 🙄

Do you remember how progressive tech companies were back during Gamergate? Oh, yeah. I do: Not at all. Do you know the reputation that tech bros have for their progressive politics? I do: None at all.

I do not think I can roll my eyes any harder. What a load of BS, all the tech billionaires care about is making more money and buying more power. Who the hell do they think they are kidding? They were progressive because it is good for business.

We’ve been dunking on this image a lot but have we dunked on the things in Noah’s manifesto? A. It’s a good thing if Trump deprives unions of power. B. Migrant camps? It’s fine if we just deport asylum seekers and “illegal immigrants.”

Clearly the big takeaway is pseudo sanctimonious "PrOgReSsiVe" poser men are easily manipulated by #GreenTeaParty #Berniebro #Grifters like #ZypherTeachout equating #ElonMusk w/the entirety of BiG TECH in a POST ELECTION hit piece. 🤡 @karlbode.com @maxkennerly.bsky.social @sethabramson.bsky.social

Lovely Liberal@lovelyliberal.bsky.social

#Wtf?! 😧 Are you srsly platforming "PrOgReSsiVe" poser #ZypherTeachout?! Serious question: 🤡💩 #WTF IS WRONG W/YOU? Do you not know what #Berniebro #Grifters like this 4x LOSER are doing to our Dem party? Or do I not *know* YOU & this is the dumbfuckery you support? @sethabramson.bsky.social

Surface level analysis here but I'm always struck by how much this kind of attitude mirrors basic incel philosophy. "We were nice to you for years and when we tried to do something you didn't want you said no, now I'm blackpilled"

This contingent of writers is really, really into accommodating, defending, apologizing for, and rationalizing the powerful, aren’t they? And it will bring them—meaning the writers, but also the powerful figures they kiss up to—continued, probably increasing success.

It does & it doesn't for the writers. They are infinitely replaceable so first time they annoy the billionaires, they can be out on their butt. They must constantly be fluffers to survive or prosper.

The ride hail companies alone spent gobs of money and the better part of a decade in every state capitol possible trying to stop/slow any kind of regulation possible. Miss me with this haute take that is untethered to reality.

June 2016 re: Andreesen: “He supported Mitt Romney in 2012, and has been fairly outspoken on Twitter about his libertarian pro-business views on many issues, so the question wasn't totally out of line.” I mean obviously he’s progressive 🙄 www.businessinsider.com/marc-andrees...

businessinsider.comMarc Andreessen on why he's supporting Clinton over Trump: 'Is that a serious question?'It comes down to four reasons, Andreessen says: He prefers Clinton's stances on science, free markets, trade, and immigration.

“Tech,” no matter how big or small, has no feelings. The stunted egos of the lords of “Tech,” however, seem to be imprisoned by their feelings (inadequacy, victimhood, jealousy, etc.)

These companies intentionally targeted newspapers revenue, boosted hate speech - all for the $$$. They’ve never been an ally to progressives. They are the Walmart of the 2000s - destroying the neighborhood and not caring one bit.

Andreesen has always believed that that the "concerns of Big Tech"--which are synonymous with his own wealth, power, and self-interest--are primary. Any perceived alliance with progressive values was simple financial calculus.

They should move out of the liberal places of the country to the non liberal places, not just move from blue state to red state but move to a red area in a red state. They can have their workforce recruited from the hillbillies and white supremacists. Let's see how it would work out for them.

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5, what is the value of Noah Smith’s thoughts? Didn’t he have to blog years ago? & Marc went on Rogan, is pushing conspiracy theories abt the CFPB (they’re debanking Trump supporters!)