This is so interesting. ‘Tech is a tool, not a telos’ sums up very well one of the main things that is going wrong, here.
What’s very peculiar, watching the current catastrophe unfold, is that one can see not even the desire to build tools or use them or even to make them ubiquitous in harmful ways (though there is that) but something much more along the lines of a full-blown fantasy, some kind of gaming that is going on. The system of government is like some puzzle to be defeated within a game. The agencies are like challenges, little nodes you bust open, and the opponent in the game is society itself (this society but ultimately global society). Then, once you have busted that up, you rebuild a new structure on top, replacing all the bits with the things which you control, instead of those which your enemy controls. Then, you’ve completed the game. The vast complexity of an actual civilization or the possibility of consequences isn’t relevant, because you are the player—you are completely outside the game. The consequences aren’t yours, they are for others.
The people in charge of this, the termites chewing away at the wires, aren’t primarily the people that make things but the people that hire other people to make things, which they end up selling. That might be why the idea of destroying so many things that other people have made, millions of people over generations, that all people in the society are dependent on, comes so naturally. If you are primarily a salesman and not a maker, you are likely not to respect the work that’s gone into anything someone else has made. Indeed, that gets in your way, because you can’t make money off something somebody else has made—you need a space for the things you want to sell.
They are enamored of tech but they are not excited or impressed enough by science not to destroy in a few days much of what’s necessary for the practice of science. They like to throw ideas out there—but they use ideas for selling, not for making. The truth of the ideas isn’t of interest, only how people respond to the ideas matters. These salesmen don’t have to build, so they don’t have to deeply know the inner workings of things or think like engineers about what things were made for—this makes it much easier to perceive things that exist, including other people, as important to defeat as part of a game, obstacles to completion. Remove those things so you can sell your things instead.
I suppose this is why they don’t seem to understand how, in good science fiction, the futuristic gadgets are there to drive the narrative to explore fine grained details of the human situation, because it’s going to be the subjective beings that matter in the story, not the tech—which is a tool to explore something human (or if another conscious entity, the value of the subjectivity of whomever the character is). That’s the whole point—any of the twists introduced by technology are of interest if the subjectivities the story explores is valued for itself. The tech oligarchs speak of their interest in technology like bad science fiction where everything is perceived from the outside, characters are just an excuse to talk about gadgets, and the admiration goes to the objects, because they are excitingly futuristic.
But this caused me to have a scary thought. If the Nazi mass murder reflected the norms of efficiency and productivity of industrial manufacturing, I wonder if this crowd turns to mass murder, as one might suppose will become appealing from the way they talk, what form would it take? Possibly a lot of the destruction, and potential death will simply come from failure to understand most of the reality of a society, and mucking around to open up markets that they want. But if they get caught up in a urge for further and further control, then I suppose the models in their heads will dictate what fate they want to inflict on all the inconvenient humans. It wouldn’t be industrial and efficient like the Nazi murder factories but something else like cutting people off from the goods they need to survive—using some kind of algorithm to decide who is worthy of persistence.
I realize that thought’s a little far out, but these people genuinely seem far out—they imagine they can do things that they can’t possibly do, like live forever. They are like the Nazis in that they have invented deranged conceptions of the human body and humanity itself that they seem driven to want to experiment with, and they don’t seem inhibited by the usual moral constraints.
Interesting thoughts. I think you are on to something as many software engineers are gamers and if in their 20s may not have spent their time in college philosophizing with others but instead gaming. So they are missing an important part of intellectual development.
That'll be why many of them got into surface-level philosophies (like the watered-down Stoicism of the manosphere) and fingernail-to-dirt understanding of anything resembling actual science (see Jordan Peterson's warped view of Jungian psychology and AI devs' idiotic view of neurocognition and neural processes). See also their use of workflows and checks that a fresh engineering grad could tell you doesn't at all work in real-world engineering — despite the insistence on calling themselves engineers.
Too much time focused on monetization and their hobbies to dig much deeper than that. We are where we are, largely, because SV, at least since the dotcom bust, happily built its culture on progress-over-anything, money-over-people, and rent-seeking.
This is so true. Interests tend toward the outside of things, how they appear. Why did the culture shift this way I wonder? Is it because one can make a fortune through schemes, which looks easy but building/creating doesn’t necessarily result in a fortune, and is also much harder? The financialization of everything pushed people to shape themselves in that direction? Whatever the cause, it’s not a good development to say the least.
I've wondered that myself. You can argue its a by-product of postwar bootstrap-individualism, a side-effect of the Cold War propaganda we used against the Soviets (which largely did hinge on bootstrap ideology — that anyone could become rich through nothing but hard work because America), consumerism (everything is commoditized — even ideologies), like you say — financialization/everyone-as-credit-score, or some mix of all of it, and probably with some decent-enough intentions paving that particular road to Hell.
To an extent, people always have been that way, in fairness to the species. Survival instinct makes us fairly short-sighted. There's been several studies in psychology about what's called "temporal myopia." Our inherent difficulty in seeing the forest vs. the trees, and our bias toward short-term decision making.
That too probably plays a role. I mean, really, what's easier to sell?
1. That building a business is hard work, the startup phase lasts 3-5 years on average, you'll be broke for most of that, but with dedication, sacrifice, constant learning, and actual hard (if mental) labor and long hours — you can make something of yourself. You probably won't be rich. But just about anyone can, eventually, replace their day job income.
2. Buy my course and I'll show you how I made $10,000 a month by tweeting three times a day.
Temporal myopia ties into why that sells better. Who really wants to live on ramen for a few years, just to make a $30-60k take-home, if, at least you can believe, that squeezing in a couple hours a day can net you absurd amounts of money — and the security it provides?
It's why snake oil still sells.
The #2 crowd doesn't mention that the bulk of their recurring revenue comes from...selling that particular bottle of snake oil. The course. The scam.
That scam, the get-rich-quick scheme, is nearly as old as humanity itself. We're primed for it.
On some level, what we see today, from years of political and economic choices, media biases, outright propaganda, etc. isn't all that far removed. We have a society that intrinsically binds self-improvement, social improvement, and financial improvement. It's one of the grand truths in publishing — nothing sells like easy ways to improve health, wealth, and relationships.
And all that is, is what the modern form is. Being able to feel like a philosopher, an engineer, some Nietzschen übermensch, without having to put forth the time and effort. Or the theatrical equivalent — "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying."
It is undoubtedly piggybacking on some human characteristics but it's somewhat interesting to me that it's so easy to bypass other ones--like when people trade wealth for meaningful human connection or even prefer it to that. Our minds are being organized in a particular way in all periods and in all cultures and I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how fast it happens or the permutations it takes. But for some reason I ALWAYS AM. It sometimes seems like a type of mass hypnosis, depending on how bizarre and ultimately self-defeating it gets. If you're looking at 'self-help' this means you are striving for some end...and then your end is...blech! Entirely ephemeral. And it requires self-erasure to such a large degree. But then I guess that's when people turn to the bottle or the needle or the whatever...Not always, but often.
Track 3: "The thing that I can’t get over is that the actual richest man in the world directed my fucking firing. I make $50k a year and work to keep drinking water safe. The richest man in the world decided that was an expense too great for the American taxpayer."
And made sure to get paid 7 million for his first week of destruction. Made another 400 million contract for his crappy Cybertruck. Reselling it as an armored junk heap. Closed all investigations into his various companies. Despite his billion dollars of wealth hires dime store hackers for his big project. He is not the sharpest tool. But even dull tools are capable of making a huge mess.
More money for SpaceX too while we're at it. Also shutting down NHTSA investigations into falsified safety reports for Tesla going back years.
SpaceX is just Cold War Soviet tech that the original engineers couldn't get to work reliably. The priority at SpaceX is what it is at Tesla — the Pimp My Ride school of engineering: load it with as much fancy tech as possible and try to forget it's a '96 Caravan with a blown head gasket. It's a money pit.
“cutting people off from the goods they need to survive—using some kind of algorithm to decide who is worthy of persistence”
An AI trying to optimize society without moral constraints in its training set would find, like politicians without moral constraints, that non-participants in the GDP are most expendable: the disabled, the non-working elderly boomers, the poor who have already fallen through the defunded safety net.
I could write for days about this. My 19 year old that died started to believe life was just a simulation and became so nihilistic. These guys treat life like a video game. These are deeply cynical and don’t think their choices really matter or have any true moral effect on our world. They are deeply narcissistic and selfish. They are bad actors because it’s capitalism without guardrails
I am so sorry for your loss. Been there. Twice. 💔 I keep coming back to the postings here notwithstanding I’m not a big fan of Substack (weak authoring platform, IMO, and, as a retiree, I’m trying to not outlive my money). I’ve been pretty much on “tilt“ since January 20th. BTW, I recommend to all the writings of Shannon Vallor (“The AI Mirror”), Brian Klaas (Flukes”), Sara Imari Walker (what an underachiever SHE is: PhD theoretical physicist and astro/exobiologist “Life, As We Never Knew It”)…
I mean where is better than Substack? I feel like it’s helping me survive right now to read like minded people and I’ve canceled all my news subscriptions and using the money here instead
When Musk warned about A.I. wasn’t that simply a cynical ploy to try and stop OpenAI/Sam Altman? I’m not sure Musk was ever actually interested in any ethical concerns, or if he was then it’s framed by being an insane, white supremacist who thinks he is God.
Came here to say that. I'm fairly sure nobody outside the SV bubble and/or knew anything at all of Musk was surprised by it just being a cover for a power play against OpenAI.
Bravo. I agree and endorse your reasoning and conclusions. Thank you, Mr. Brock. I would like to add in a proposal for remedying the problem you outlined. The problem is we have a technology which if mishandled will harm human beings but also helps humanity if ethically deployed.
We have other, older technologies and professions which also have the power to harm people if misused by the practitioner. We have learned to control and mitigate the harm from the practice of medicine and law, to name just a couple of examples. So, I propose a licensing scheme for programmers somewhat like my license as a lawyer.
Lawyers are given a license to practice. If they violate the ethical rules upon which this license is conditioned, they lose their license and with it the ability to earn a living. Further, ethics are pounded into us in law school. We are admonished to police our behavior and the behavior of our colleagues. An ethical lawyer recognizes that they have a duty to uphold the credibility of the entire profession and of the courts. Ethical lawyers, when faced with a clearly unethical order from a client or employer do what the lawyers of the SDNY did - they resign in protest. They send a message to the public that corruption is not acceptable.
You seem to be exactly the kind of guy to promulgate an ethical code for the tech industry. I wonder if anyone is even thinking in these terms within the industry? Just thought I'd plant a seed.
My father got into computers so early that he used to use the first version of AutoCad. He used to tell me that he was proud to be part of the "computer revolution", but feared one day people would realize the word 'revolution' has more than one definition.
Your post recalls Martin Heidegger's quote: “The essence of technology is by no means anything technological.” From his essay "The Question Concerning Technology".
Hi Mike. Thanks for continuing to crank these pieces out - it is comforting to know that others are on my wavelength. Sad though it may be, the ostracism is not unexpected. I'm honestly rather envious of your 'FU money' and the ability to switch to the soapbox full time. Your experience only validates for me that my authentic voice would be considered subversive by the tech industry, which to your point has really embraced the 'do no good' ethos with a gusto. If it wouldn't land me on the street, I'd lambast these conformist, hubristic, shallow 'leaders' on a daily basis and would join you for a road show.
Alas, I still need to play nice to survive, and it pains me when I talk with brilliant engineers who hide behind their TC and bandwagon solidarity, refusing to connect these blinking red, klaxon-like dots. Please keep fighting - perhaps someday our AI overlords will see your post and reflect...
Weird that people who thrived in authoritarian institutions believe they will thrive in an authoritarian society.
Weird that people who treat employees as unreliable and unruly economic inputs would be excited by the potential of a reliable and sycophantic replacement input.
SV has always been thus. And now that you got yours, you allow yourself to see it.
The “liberal” mistake was abandoning the light touch regulation of the ‘90s / ‘00s. SV was forced to learn how to play the campaign finance game and is collectively the best resourced player in it.
America’s demos has always been led by its oligarchy. All of the founding fathers were rich and powerful, all understood the power of their newspapers. So much so that the federalist papers were crystal clear on this intent.
Mike: Please keep writing - if there was ever a time to bring this philosophy and these voices out - it is now, and thank you for the care, conviction, and courage it takes to do so.
I’ve made my life’s quest a search for the truth of human experience, because the abstract rationality that sees numbers not humans does not have emotion and therefore no empathy.
Thank God for people like you who have the background and understanding of the inner workings of the developing technology, coupled with a philosophical viewpoint that we should all be working towards a betterment of everybody’s life on this planet and not a power struggle to destroy “everybody who is not like me”
This country was founded on FREEDOMS - which the current leaders of our country are desperately working to remove - they want us to succumb to their wishes, their views, their whims.
I hope we continue to have independent journalists who will be able to recognize and explain the truth about what is going on. Knowledge is power. Sharing the knowledge with as many people as possible gives us the ability to fight back against authoritarianism .
As long as we are a country that is governed by the rule of law, and an awareness by a majority of the people in this country of what it means to live under an authoritarian rule, I believe we can overcome this dark chapter in ourcountry’s history
And as they bend the legal system to their will and turn it into an instrument of arbitrary power, they’re cutting off all peaceful avenues of resistance. And this is happening at the exact same time that we’re racing in the very near future towards artificial general intelligence, with the public largely cut out of the decision process. Things are converging towards a boiling point. We’re going to have a Luddite revolution in this country. TK was prescient.
This is so interesting. ‘Tech is a tool, not a telos’ sums up very well one of the main things that is going wrong, here.
What’s very peculiar, watching the current catastrophe unfold, is that one can see not even the desire to build tools or use them or even to make them ubiquitous in harmful ways (though there is that) but something much more along the lines of a full-blown fantasy, some kind of gaming that is going on. The system of government is like some puzzle to be defeated within a game. The agencies are like challenges, little nodes you bust open, and the opponent in the game is society itself (this society but ultimately global society). Then, once you have busted that up, you rebuild a new structure on top, replacing all the bits with the things which you control, instead of those which your enemy controls. Then, you’ve completed the game. The vast complexity of an actual civilization or the possibility of consequences isn’t relevant, because you are the player—you are completely outside the game. The consequences aren’t yours, they are for others.
The people in charge of this, the termites chewing away at the wires, aren’t primarily the people that make things but the people that hire other people to make things, which they end up selling. That might be why the idea of destroying so many things that other people have made, millions of people over generations, that all people in the society are dependent on, comes so naturally. If you are primarily a salesman and not a maker, you are likely not to respect the work that’s gone into anything someone else has made. Indeed, that gets in your way, because you can’t make money off something somebody else has made—you need a space for the things you want to sell.
They are enamored of tech but they are not excited or impressed enough by science not to destroy in a few days much of what’s necessary for the practice of science. They like to throw ideas out there—but they use ideas for selling, not for making. The truth of the ideas isn’t of interest, only how people respond to the ideas matters. These salesmen don’t have to build, so they don’t have to deeply know the inner workings of things or think like engineers about what things were made for—this makes it much easier to perceive things that exist, including other people, as important to defeat as part of a game, obstacles to completion. Remove those things so you can sell your things instead.
I suppose this is why they don’t seem to understand how, in good science fiction, the futuristic gadgets are there to drive the narrative to explore fine grained details of the human situation, because it’s going to be the subjective beings that matter in the story, not the tech—which is a tool to explore something human (or if another conscious entity, the value of the subjectivity of whomever the character is). That’s the whole point—any of the twists introduced by technology are of interest if the subjectivities the story explores is valued for itself. The tech oligarchs speak of their interest in technology like bad science fiction where everything is perceived from the outside, characters are just an excuse to talk about gadgets, and the admiration goes to the objects, because they are excitingly futuristic.
But this caused me to have a scary thought. If the Nazi mass murder reflected the norms of efficiency and productivity of industrial manufacturing, I wonder if this crowd turns to mass murder, as one might suppose will become appealing from the way they talk, what form would it take? Possibly a lot of the destruction, and potential death will simply come from failure to understand most of the reality of a society, and mucking around to open up markets that they want. But if they get caught up in a urge for further and further control, then I suppose the models in their heads will dictate what fate they want to inflict on all the inconvenient humans. It wouldn’t be industrial and efficient like the Nazi murder factories but something else like cutting people off from the goods they need to survive—using some kind of algorithm to decide who is worthy of persistence.
I realize that thought’s a little far out, but these people genuinely seem far out—they imagine they can do things that they can’t possibly do, like live forever. They are like the Nazis in that they have invented deranged conceptions of the human body and humanity itself that they seem driven to want to experiment with, and they don’t seem inhibited by the usual moral constraints.
Interesting thoughts. I think you are on to something as many software engineers are gamers and if in their 20s may not have spent their time in college philosophizing with others but instead gaming. So they are missing an important part of intellectual development.
Heaven help us
That'll be why many of them got into surface-level philosophies (like the watered-down Stoicism of the manosphere) and fingernail-to-dirt understanding of anything resembling actual science (see Jordan Peterson's warped view of Jungian psychology and AI devs' idiotic view of neurocognition and neural processes). See also their use of workflows and checks that a fresh engineering grad could tell you doesn't at all work in real-world engineering — despite the insistence on calling themselves engineers.
Too much time focused on monetization and their hobbies to dig much deeper than that. We are where we are, largely, because SV, at least since the dotcom bust, happily built its culture on progress-over-anything, money-over-people, and rent-seeking.
This is so true. Interests tend toward the outside of things, how they appear. Why did the culture shift this way I wonder? Is it because one can make a fortune through schemes, which looks easy but building/creating doesn’t necessarily result in a fortune, and is also much harder? The financialization of everything pushed people to shape themselves in that direction? Whatever the cause, it’s not a good development to say the least.
I've wondered that myself. You can argue its a by-product of postwar bootstrap-individualism, a side-effect of the Cold War propaganda we used against the Soviets (which largely did hinge on bootstrap ideology — that anyone could become rich through nothing but hard work because America), consumerism (everything is commoditized — even ideologies), like you say — financialization/everyone-as-credit-score, or some mix of all of it, and probably with some decent-enough intentions paving that particular road to Hell.
To an extent, people always have been that way, in fairness to the species. Survival instinct makes us fairly short-sighted. There's been several studies in psychology about what's called "temporal myopia." Our inherent difficulty in seeing the forest vs. the trees, and our bias toward short-term decision making.
That too probably plays a role. I mean, really, what's easier to sell?
1. That building a business is hard work, the startup phase lasts 3-5 years on average, you'll be broke for most of that, but with dedication, sacrifice, constant learning, and actual hard (if mental) labor and long hours — you can make something of yourself. You probably won't be rich. But just about anyone can, eventually, replace their day job income.
2. Buy my course and I'll show you how I made $10,000 a month by tweeting three times a day.
Temporal myopia ties into why that sells better. Who really wants to live on ramen for a few years, just to make a $30-60k take-home, if, at least you can believe, that squeezing in a couple hours a day can net you absurd amounts of money — and the security it provides?
It's why snake oil still sells.
The #2 crowd doesn't mention that the bulk of their recurring revenue comes from...selling that particular bottle of snake oil. The course. The scam.
That scam, the get-rich-quick scheme, is nearly as old as humanity itself. We're primed for it.
On some level, what we see today, from years of political and economic choices, media biases, outright propaganda, etc. isn't all that far removed. We have a society that intrinsically binds self-improvement, social improvement, and financial improvement. It's one of the grand truths in publishing — nothing sells like easy ways to improve health, wealth, and relationships.
And all that is, is what the modern form is. Being able to feel like a philosopher, an engineer, some Nietzschen übermensch, without having to put forth the time and effort. Or the theatrical equivalent — "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying."
It is undoubtedly piggybacking on some human characteristics but it's somewhat interesting to me that it's so easy to bypass other ones--like when people trade wealth for meaningful human connection or even prefer it to that. Our minds are being organized in a particular way in all periods and in all cultures and I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how fast it happens or the permutations it takes. But for some reason I ALWAYS AM. It sometimes seems like a type of mass hypnosis, depending on how bizarre and ultimately self-defeating it gets. If you're looking at 'self-help' this means you are striving for some end...and then your end is...blech! Entirely ephemeral. And it requires self-erasure to such a large degree. But then I guess that's when people turn to the bottle or the needle or the whatever...Not always, but often.
I actually don’t think it’s that far fetched because when you objectify people they are no longer human and objects only exist to serve you
Mass murder? Hmmm, do away with NIH and CDC, zero out Medicare, and welcome to the Dime-Store Nietzscheans new CD, Anti-Social Darwisnism.
Track 3: "The thing that I can’t get over is that the actual richest man in the world directed my fucking firing. I make $50k a year and work to keep drinking water safe. The richest man in the world decided that was an expense too great for the American taxpayer."
And made sure to get paid 7 million for his first week of destruction. Made another 400 million contract for his crappy Cybertruck. Reselling it as an armored junk heap. Closed all investigations into his various companies. Despite his billion dollars of wealth hires dime store hackers for his big project. He is not the sharpest tool. But even dull tools are capable of making a huge mess.
More money for SpaceX too while we're at it. Also shutting down NHTSA investigations into falsified safety reports for Tesla going back years.
SpaceX is just Cold War Soviet tech that the original engineers couldn't get to work reliably. The priority at SpaceX is what it is at Tesla — the Pimp My Ride school of engineering: load it with as much fancy tech as possible and try to forget it's a '96 Caravan with a blown head gasket. It's a money pit.
“cutting people off from the goods they need to survive—using some kind of algorithm to decide who is worthy of persistence”
An AI trying to optimize society without moral constraints in its training set would find, like politicians without moral constraints, that non-participants in the GDP are most expendable: the disabled, the non-working elderly boomers, the poor who have already fallen through the defunded safety net.
Reminiscent of The Giver (or the lessons to learn from that society)
We have been talking about this among some close friends for awhile - it’s quite scary
Exactly
I could write for days about this. My 19 year old that died started to believe life was just a simulation and became so nihilistic. These guys treat life like a video game. These are deeply cynical and don’t think their choices really matter or have any true moral effect on our world. They are deeply narcissistic and selfish. They are bad actors because it’s capitalism without guardrails
I am so sorry for your loss. Been there. Twice. 💔 I keep coming back to the postings here notwithstanding I’m not a big fan of Substack (weak authoring platform, IMO, and, as a retiree, I’m trying to not outlive my money). I’ve been pretty much on “tilt“ since January 20th. BTW, I recommend to all the writings of Shannon Vallor (“The AI Mirror”), Brian Klaas (Flukes”), Sara Imari Walker (what an underachiever SHE is: PhD theoretical physicist and astro/exobiologist “Life, As We Never Knew It”)…
Thanks adding all of these to my reading list
I mean where is better than Substack? I feel like it’s helping me survive right now to read like minded people and I’ve canceled all my news subscriptions and using the money here instead
I canceled all social media except this and Bluesky
When Musk warned about A.I. wasn’t that simply a cynical ploy to try and stop OpenAI/Sam Altman? I’m not sure Musk was ever actually interested in any ethical concerns, or if he was then it’s framed by being an insane, white supremacist who thinks he is God.
Came here to say that. I'm fairly sure nobody outside the SV bubble and/or knew anything at all of Musk was surprised by it just being a cover for a power play against OpenAI.
Bravo. I agree and endorse your reasoning and conclusions. Thank you, Mr. Brock. I would like to add in a proposal for remedying the problem you outlined. The problem is we have a technology which if mishandled will harm human beings but also helps humanity if ethically deployed.
We have other, older technologies and professions which also have the power to harm people if misused by the practitioner. We have learned to control and mitigate the harm from the practice of medicine and law, to name just a couple of examples. So, I propose a licensing scheme for programmers somewhat like my license as a lawyer.
Lawyers are given a license to practice. If they violate the ethical rules upon which this license is conditioned, they lose their license and with it the ability to earn a living. Further, ethics are pounded into us in law school. We are admonished to police our behavior and the behavior of our colleagues. An ethical lawyer recognizes that they have a duty to uphold the credibility of the entire profession and of the courts. Ethical lawyers, when faced with a clearly unethical order from a client or employer do what the lawyers of the SDNY did - they resign in protest. They send a message to the public that corruption is not acceptable.
You seem to be exactly the kind of guy to promulgate an ethical code for the tech industry. I wonder if anyone is even thinking in these terms within the industry? Just thought I'd plant a seed.
THIS is a good idea…an actual “thing” that can be employed toward ethical governance. Kudos
My father got into computers so early that he used to use the first version of AutoCad. He used to tell me that he was proud to be part of the "computer revolution", but feared one day people would realize the word 'revolution' has more than one definition.
Your post recalls Martin Heidegger's quote: “The essence of technology is by no means anything technological.” From his essay "The Question Concerning Technology".
"Not about my previous employer, mind you—I remain genuinely appreciative of their ethical standards and mission. "
Meanwhile, CashApp paid $255 million in regulatory fraud to Federal regulators and CFPB. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/16/business/cash-app-fraud-settlement.html
Mike, what you are experiencing is common. It happens to a lot of people who make their millions and then suddenly develop a high/horse conscience.
Lukewarm take. Are you aware of the base rate of fraud settlements for the banking industry?
Lordy, mercy. Ouch.
Very insightful and thoughtful. Thank you.
related: https://cryptadamus.substack.com/p/of-tech-bros-and-trumpers
Hi Mike. Thanks for continuing to crank these pieces out - it is comforting to know that others are on my wavelength. Sad though it may be, the ostracism is not unexpected. I'm honestly rather envious of your 'FU money' and the ability to switch to the soapbox full time. Your experience only validates for me that my authentic voice would be considered subversive by the tech industry, which to your point has really embraced the 'do no good' ethos with a gusto. If it wouldn't land me on the street, I'd lambast these conformist, hubristic, shallow 'leaders' on a daily basis and would join you for a road show.
Alas, I still need to play nice to survive, and it pains me when I talk with brilliant engineers who hide behind their TC and bandwagon solidarity, refusing to connect these blinking red, klaxon-like dots. Please keep fighting - perhaps someday our AI overlords will see your post and reflect...
Weird that people who thrived in authoritarian institutions believe they will thrive in an authoritarian society.
Weird that people who treat employees as unreliable and unruly economic inputs would be excited by the potential of a reliable and sycophantic replacement input.
SV has always been thus. And now that you got yours, you allow yourself to see it.
The “liberal” mistake was abandoning the light touch regulation of the ‘90s / ‘00s. SV was forced to learn how to play the campaign finance game and is collectively the best resourced player in it.
America’s demos has always been led by its oligarchy. All of the founding fathers were rich and powerful, all understood the power of their newspapers. So much so that the federalist papers were crystal clear on this intent.
Mike: Please keep writing - if there was ever a time to bring this philosophy and these voices out - it is now, and thank you for the care, conviction, and courage it takes to do so.
I’ve made my life’s quest a search for the truth of human experience, because the abstract rationality that sees numbers not humans does not have emotion and therefore no empathy.
Thank God for people like you who have the background and understanding of the inner workings of the developing technology, coupled with a philosophical viewpoint that we should all be working towards a betterment of everybody’s life on this planet and not a power struggle to destroy “everybody who is not like me”
This country was founded on FREEDOMS - which the current leaders of our country are desperately working to remove - they want us to succumb to their wishes, their views, their whims.
I hope we continue to have independent journalists who will be able to recognize and explain the truth about what is going on. Knowledge is power. Sharing the knowledge with as many people as possible gives us the ability to fight back against authoritarianism .
As long as we are a country that is governed by the rule of law, and an awareness by a majority of the people in this country of what it means to live under an authoritarian rule, I believe we can overcome this dark chapter in ourcountry’s history
And as they bend the legal system to their will and turn it into an instrument of arbitrary power, they’re cutting off all peaceful avenues of resistance. And this is happening at the exact same time that we’re racing in the very near future towards artificial general intelligence, with the public largely cut out of the decision process. Things are converging towards a boiling point. We’re going to have a Luddite revolution in this country. TK was prescient.
Sorry for your suffering but do keep raising your voice. We all need to bring back humanities into the public sphere
Damn. I'm so sorry Stacy - stay strong - v-hugs to you 🙏
Agreed