I couldn't help but laugh incredulously as I read this article. It checks all the boxes I'd expect it to check. You can practically shout "bingo!" at the end.

I couldn't help but laugh incredulously as I read this article. It checks all the boxes I'd expect it to check. You can practically shout "bingo!" at the end. • "Silicon Valley isn't spending time working on stuff _I_ think is valuable." • "So what if kids find Snapchat to be critical. Those kids are "connected" and therefore don't matter! _I_ don't get it, therefore it's dumb!" (Even though it's very easy to demonstrate many social networks do in fact engage with and edify kids in low income families because of specific allotments of social media time in schools.) • "Universal Basic Income is bad because people have a deep seated desire to work and their basic needs aren't being met, so rather than triaging that problem and lifting them out of the toxic debt spirals that entrap them in this state, we should focus on _educating them._" • "Taxpayers as a whole have no business helping the less fortunate. This is the sole responsibility business." (Even as we then mock them." • "Therefore businesses should have the mandate to make people's lives better, rather than offering them better solutions. That's not presumptuous at all." These are all implications of the worldview of this article. It's cleverly couched in terms mocking Sam Altman's naive view of the world and then somehow using that to pave over the huge amount of work all over the country on technology centering around education, medical treatment, financial improvement, legal automation, etc. And in the end, of course, this article is about... DISRUPTING VENTURE CAPITALISM. Because again, THAT top-down view of the world is bad, but OUR top-down plan will be totally great.