3 ms·

I don't understand the singling out of Web 2.0 as some kind of outlier in the history of capitalist enterprise. As if the Rothchilds & Morgans of the world were

by bmac27 15y ago

I don't understand the singling out of Web 2.0 as some kind of outlier in the history of capitalist enterprise. As if the Rothchilds & Morgans of the world were saintly characters who didn't see their customers the same way while they were coercing government entities to tip the scales in their favor. The rest of the piece was fine, if not another instance of piling on. But I couldn't get over that initial thought.

potatolicious 15y ago
Nobody claimed that the Rothschilds and the Morgans were saints - but the undercurrent that has powered the technology revolution (and the way the industry likes to be portrayed in the media) is that of educated people, wielding the powers of science and technology for the betterment of lives. In other words, these technological wunderkinds were supposed to be better than the robber barons of old - a new breed of entrepreneur... getting rich and making the world better while they're at it. This attitude is reflected in the industry's shunning of traditional business culture, the constant focus on passion (that even bureaucratic giants like Intel are embracing as a public persona) Web 2.0 has mostly failed that test, so far, IMO. I'm inclined to side with the author. I'll buy that Facebook has revolutionized socialization and communication... but who else is willing to step up to the "dramatically disrupted and made better" plate? Funnily enough, I see AirBNB as one of the better startups to come out of this bubble - they tapped into enormous unrealized demand (for both hosts and travelers) in an innovative way, put enormous pressure on the slow, lumbering, and inefficient hotel industry... if anything AirBNB represents the startups that the author is looking for. My real complaint is the masses upon masses of "we're like X, with social!" startups.
- bmac27 15y ago
  "In other words, these technological wunderkinds were supposed to be better than the robber barons of old - a new breed of entrepreneur... getting rich and making the world better while they're at it." Well I never bought into that narrative from the get go so I wasn't taken aback by something like this taking place. Science & technology are tools. Those wielding the tools still have the ultimate say in whether or not a company does good or evil. And as there were a hundred years (or more) ago, there will be folks that abuse this power and those who empower others with it.
- OstiaAntica 15y ago
  I don't even buy the Facebook argument. They just made a cleaner, consistent MySpace.
  - veyron 15y ago
    Facebook managed to reach critical mass, which MySpace could never do.

by bmac27 15y ago

potatolicious 15y ago

Nobody claimed that the Rothschilds and the Morgans were saints - but the undercurrent that has powered the technology revolution (and the way the industry likes to be portrayed in the media) is that of educated people, wielding the powers of science and technology for the betterment of lives. In other words, these technological wunderkinds were supposed to be better than the robber barons of old - a new breed of entrepreneur... getting rich and making the world better while they're at it. This attitude is reflected in the industry's shunning of traditional business culture, the constant focus on passion (that even bureaucratic giants like Intel are embracing as a public persona) Web 2.0 has mostly failed that test, so far, IMO. I'm inclined to side with the author. I'll buy that Facebook has revolutionized socialization and communication... but who else is willing to step up to the "dramatically disrupted and made better" plate? Funnily enough, I see AirBNB as one of the better startups to come out of this bubble - they tapped into enormous unrealized demand (for both hosts and travelers) in an innovative way, put enormous pressure on the slow, lumbering, and inefficient hotel industry... if anything AirBNB represents the startups that the author is looking for. My real complaint is the masses upon masses of "we're like X, with social!" startups.

bmac27 15y ago
"In other words, these technological wunderkinds were supposed to be better than the robber barons of old - a new breed of entrepreneur... getting rich and making the world better while they're at it." Well I never bought into that narrative from the get go so I wasn't taken aback by something like this taking place. Science & technology are tools. Those wielding the tools still have the ultimate say in whether or not a company does good or evil. And as there were a hundred years (or more) ago, there will be folks that abuse this power and those who empower others with it.
OstiaAntica 15y ago
I don't even buy the Facebook argument. They just made a cleaner, consistent MySpace.
- veyron 15y ago
  Facebook managed to reach critical mass, which MySpace could never do.