4 ms·

I think some of the people that do have a problem with SV or tech in general also just have a problem with people they perceive as having lower social status su

by jrs95 9y ago

I think some of the people that do have a problem with SV or tech in general also just have a problem with people they perceive as having lower social status succeeding. It's not anti-intellectualism exactly, but it sort of parallels it in my opinion.

gt_ 9y ago
I agree. It is not the classic anti-intellectualism, but I think a refined version of it.
- austenallred 9y ago
  It’s old money vs. new money. New money doesn’t respect the culture, rituals, and hierarchy created by the old guard. And because tech is printing money it doesn’t have to.
  - siquick 9y ago
    > New money doesn’t respect the culture, rituals, and hierarchy created by the old guard. Can you expand on why this is a problem?
    - gt_ 9y ago
      Not the commenter but pretty sure that's not a problem, but old money is bothered by it because they want respect and control because aristocracy.
jes5199 9y ago
people in SV aren’t “suceeding” - they’re making twice as much money as everyone else in exchange for creating systems of surveillance. I’m not surprised people are salty about it.
- GhostVII 9y ago
  > they’re making twice as much money as everyone else Sounds like succeeding to me. And not everyone creates "systems of surveillance" anyways, lots of other types of tech companies in Silicon Valley.
- dsacco 9y ago
  > they’re making twice as much money as everyone else ...if that's not your definition of "succeeding", then okay fine, but be aware that this is a major component of most peoples' definitions, so yours will be the unconventional one in the conversation (and therefore you should probably justify it to be persuasive). > in exchange for creating systems of surveillance If you're talking about data mining and advertising, that's hardly a neutral way to refer to it. Reasonable people can disagree that these are "systems of surveillance" because they do not consider surveillance inclusive to non-military/intelligence/law enforcement activity. Furthermore, plenty of people in Silicon Valley and tech in general do not work on advertising products. Not even everyone in companies like Google or Facebook works on advertising products.
- jrs95 9y ago
  Most people are ignorant about the whole surveillance thing, and most of those who do know don't care and don't think anything can be done about it. I'd say they're more angry because the people they thought were losers a couple years ago are making twice as much money of them. If your values system emphasizes social capital, but the economy doesn't value it nearly as much, you're going to be disappointed in yourself when socially awkward people are more successful than you.

by jrs95 9y ago

gt_ 9y ago

I agree. It is not the classic anti-intellectualism, but I think a refined version of it.

austenallred 9y ago
It’s old money vs. new money. New money doesn’t respect the culture, rituals, and hierarchy created by the old guard. And because tech is printing money it doesn’t have to.
- siquick 9y ago
  > New money doesn’t respect the culture, rituals, and hierarchy created by the old guard. Can you expand on why this is a problem?
  - gt_ 9y ago
    Not the commenter but pretty sure that's not a problem, but old money is bothered by it because they want respect and control because aristocracy.

jes5199 9y ago

people in SV aren’t “suceeding” - they’re making twice as much money as everyone else in exchange for creating systems of surveillance. I’m not surprised people are salty about it.

GhostVII 9y ago
> they’re making twice as much money as everyone else Sounds like succeeding to me. And not everyone creates "systems of surveillance" anyways, lots of other types of tech companies in Silicon Valley.
dsacco 9y ago
> they’re making twice as much money as everyone else ...if that's not your definition of "succeeding", then okay fine, but be aware that this is a major component of most peoples' definitions, so yours will be the unconventional one in the conversation (and therefore you should probably justify it to be persuasive). > in exchange for creating systems of surveillance If you're talking about data mining and advertising, that's hardly a neutral way to refer to it. Reasonable people can disagree that these are "systems of surveillance" because they do not consider surveillance inclusive to non-military/intelligence/law enforcement activity. Furthermore, plenty of people in Silicon Valley and tech in general do not work on advertising products. Not even everyone in companies like Google or Facebook works on advertising products.
jrs95 9y ago
Most people are ignorant about the whole surveillance thing, and most of those who do know don't care and don't think anything can be done about it. I'd say they're more angry because the people they thought were losers a couple years ago are making twice as much money of them. If your values system emphasizes social capital, but the economy doesn't value it nearly as much, you're going to be disappointed in yourself when socially awkward people are more successful than you.