4 ms·

There’s sort of an assumption that the status quo is some how morally superior though. And you have to keep in mind that journalists are a part of that status q

by jrs95 8y ago

There’s sort of an assumption that the status quo is some how morally superior though. And you have to keep in mind that journalists are a part of that status quo. We have one group of elites and their spokespeople bitching about the newcomer. Personally I’d take the tech douche over the academic or the bureaucrat.

ironjunkie 8y ago
There is a lot of value in introducing new valid useful ideas. This is what Silicon Valley did 20 years ago. Now, the way a lot of people see it is as a set of elite smug overly-paid tech bros arrogantly trying to change every single unneeded part of life by "disrupting it". Which usually translates into yet another stupid useless app on your smartphone to order pizza.
- jrs95 8y ago
  You’re really throwing the baby out with the bath water here, though. And you have to focus on either straw men or specific anecdotes of “disruption” in order to paint this negative overall picture. In the case of yet another app to order pizza...if nobody uses it or cares about it, then who gives a fuck? “We should be hostile to people who are in the business of creating technology because they might make something nobody wants to buy” does not make sense. Sure, maybe they’re smug and elitist idiots doing this stuff. But does it matter? And who is it that’s so interested in maligning tech as a whole? It’s their competitors in trying to accumulate wealth and power. Who, for what it’s worth, are even smugger and more elitist. Overall, my opinion of this article is that it’s too narrowly focused and while it’s opinionated it’s also shallow. This is all typical of media now though. Ultimately this is part of a larger political context, and I think the underlying motivation for this articles and others like it is no different from Alexandra Pelosi’s “San Francisco 2.0”.

by jrs95 8y ago

ironjunkie 8y ago

There is a lot of value in introducing new valid useful ideas. This is what Silicon Valley did 20 years ago. Now, the way a lot of people see it is as a set of elite smug overly-paid tech bros arrogantly trying to change every single unneeded part of life by "disrupting it". Which usually translates into yet another stupid useless app on your smartphone to order pizza.

jrs95 8y ago
You’re really throwing the baby out with the bath water here, though. And you have to focus on either straw men or specific anecdotes of “disruption” in order to paint this negative overall picture. In the case of yet another app to order pizza...if nobody uses it or cares about it, then who gives a fuck? “We should be hostile to people who are in the business of creating technology because they might make something nobody wants to buy” does not make sense. Sure, maybe they’re smug and elitist idiots doing this stuff. But does it matter? And who is it that’s so interested in maligning tech as a whole? It’s their competitors in trying to accumulate wealth and power. Who, for what it’s worth, are even smugger and more elitist. Overall, my opinion of this article is that it’s too narrowly focused and while it’s opinionated it’s also shallow. This is all typical of media now though. Ultimately this is part of a larger political context, and I think the underlying motivation for this articles and others like it is no different from Alexandra Pelosi’s “San Francisco 2.0”.