Capital (e.g., VCs) definitely see both founders and programmers as "labor". At best, highly successful founders can be seen as aspirational capital, That said,

Capital (e.g., VCs) definitely see both founders and programmers as "labor". At best, highly successful founders can be seen as aspirational capital, That said, the vast majority of founders are not perceived that way, and they are not even perceived to have the potential to become anything other than labor. Is this labor in the "classic sense"? "Yes" if you're talking about the capital/labor division. "Conditional no" if you're talking about industrial labor. Capital loves how easy it is these days to get motivated and fairly intelligent people to work for incredibly low wages, especially in the Bay Area. Some of those people actually create value that can be capitalized on. I personally consider this an abuse of labor. I imagine that industrial-style regulation is not needed, as the curtain hiding the grossly misaligned relationships will eventually be pulled back -- most likely in the next big economic downturn.