5 ms·

The party is over for the computer nerds. Back to the bottom of the social pecking order.

by freyr 5y ago

musicale 5y ago
Well, they broke up IBM and Microsoft, didn't they?
Apocryphon 5y ago
The people running the monopolies are nothing like the vast majority of "computer nerds" in the industry working under them.
- jonas21 5y ago
  Sundar Pichai, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, and Satya Nadella all have some solid "computer nerd" background. Tim Cook, maybe not so much, but if I had to guess, Apple is the one who is going to make it out of this in the best shape, if only because congresspeople love their iPhones. And regardless of leadership, there are hundreds of thousands of computer nerds who are doing quite well at these companies.
  - Apocryphon 5y ago
    I don't doubt the engineering chops of any of these people. You can say the same of Gates, Page and Brin, and so forth. But it's an extraordinary claim to say that in their present forms they are in any way in the same "social pecking order" as computer nerds.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  And yet their fates are intertwined.
  - Apocryphon 5y ago
    The employees can always go work for tech companies that aren't big monopolies. For example, startups.
    - ocdtrekkie 5y ago
      Currently, it's worth noting that the exit plan of half these startups is to get acquired by one of these monopolies, have their products killed off, and be assigned to do mundane bugfixes for core business competencies.
      - Apocryphon 5y ago
        Isn't that partly because of the same problem of the mass concentration of wealth and power into a few key players? If you have less room to strike it out on your own right, then you're dependent on a bigger fish to snatch you up. Who's to say that if the playing field was more level then more startups would have the ambition to become their own would-be monopolies? Either way, the vast majority of the "computer nerds" in the OP are different from the founder class that would be more directly impacted.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      And accept a fraction of the salary! Which is what is meant by "party's over" I'd think. The big companies not only pay the highest wages but exert upward pressure on other employers who would like to hire the same people. There are also non-monetary benefits to working at a large employer, like the greater variety of available assignments, generally better benefits (OK, sort of monetary), greater number of educational/training opportunities, and so on.
      - Apocryphon 5y ago
        Regulatory concerns or not, it's unlikely that the bull run of the past decade would've continued indefinitely. And there's plenty of post-unicorn little empires (Uber, Twitter, AirBnB, Robinhood, etc.) that probably command as great salaries as the monopolies. Not to mention there are other big tech companies that don't seem to be in regulators' crosshairs- Microsoft, Oracle, even Netflix. Neither Amazon and Apple are known to pay as great salaries as Facebook/Google, and as mentioned it's debatable whether their stock prices would've continued in as explosive growth as in past years. At any rate, if one was to break up the big companies (which isn't even likely to happen), who's to say that AdSense Inc. or Instagram wouldn't pay as well as they did when they were internal teams?
rhizome 5y ago
The computer nerds are the ones who get screwed in the equity game, it's actually the CEOs of these companies pushing them down the pecking order. Check how many founders and upper managment come from fraternities.
- freyr 5y ago
  I was referring to the ability of developers at big tech companies to command half-a-million a year comp, competitive with some doctors, lawyers, and consultants. Those days could be over if Congress gets it’s way (though I hope not). Of course CEOs are in a whole different social and compensation stratum, but that’s a different story.
emodendroket 5y ago
Probably a little early to say that.
bigbillheck 5y ago
I think the social pecking order is a little bit deeper than you're accounting for.

The party is over for the computer nerds. Back to the bottom of the social pecking order.

by freyr 5y ago

The party is over for the computer nerds. Back to the bottom of the social pecking order.

musicale 5y ago

Well, they broke up IBM and Microsoft, didn't they?

Apocryphon 5y ago

The people running the monopolies are nothing like the vast majority of "computer nerds" in the industry working under them.

jonas21 5y ago
Sundar Pichai, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, and Satya Nadella all have some solid "computer nerd" background. Tim Cook, maybe not so much, but if I had to guess, Apple is the one who is going to make it out of this in the best shape, if only because congresspeople love their iPhones. And regardless of leadership, there are hundreds of thousands of computer nerds who are doing quite well at these companies.
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  I don't doubt the engineering chops of any of these people. You can say the same of Gates, Page and Brin, and so forth. But it's an extraordinary claim to say that in their present forms they are in any way in the same "social pecking order" as computer nerds.
emodendroket 5y ago
And yet their fates are intertwined.
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  The employees can always go work for tech companies that aren't big monopolies. For example, startups.
  - ocdtrekkie 5y ago
    Currently, it's worth noting that the exit plan of half these startups is to get acquired by one of these monopolies, have their products killed off, and be assigned to do mundane bugfixes for core business competencies.
    - Apocryphon 5y ago
      Isn't that partly because of the same problem of the mass concentration of wealth and power into a few key players? If you have less room to strike it out on your own right, then you're dependent on a bigger fish to snatch you up. Who's to say that if the playing field was more level then more startups would have the ambition to become their own would-be monopolies? Either way, the vast majority of the "computer nerds" in the OP are different from the founder class that would be more directly impacted.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    And accept a fraction of the salary! Which is what is meant by "party's over" I'd think. The big companies not only pay the highest wages but exert upward pressure on other employers who would like to hire the same people. There are also non-monetary benefits to working at a large employer, like the greater variety of available assignments, generally better benefits (OK, sort of monetary), greater number of educational/training opportunities, and so on.
    - Apocryphon 5y ago
      Regulatory concerns or not, it's unlikely that the bull run of the past decade would've continued indefinitely. And there's plenty of post-unicorn little empires (Uber, Twitter, AirBnB, Robinhood, etc.) that probably command as great salaries as the monopolies. Not to mention there are other big tech companies that don't seem to be in regulators' crosshairs- Microsoft, Oracle, even Netflix. Neither Amazon and Apple are known to pay as great salaries as Facebook/Google, and as mentioned it's debatable whether their stock prices would've continued in as explosive growth as in past years. At any rate, if one was to break up the big companies (which isn't even likely to happen), who's to say that AdSense Inc. or Instagram wouldn't pay as well as they did when they were internal teams?

rhizome 5y ago

The computer nerds are the ones who get screwed in the equity game, it's actually the CEOs of these companies pushing them down the pecking order. Check how many founders and upper managment come from fraternities.

freyr 5y ago
I was referring to the ability of developers at big tech companies to command half-a-million a year comp, competitive with some doctors, lawyers, and consultants. Those days could be over if Congress gets it’s way (though I hope not). Of course CEOs are in a whole different social and compensation stratum, but that’s a different story.

emodendroket 5y ago

Probably a little early to say that.

bigbillheck 5y ago

I think the social pecking order is a little bit deeper than you're accounting for.