7 ms·

It’s called a recession. This party isn’t over, these people who have been experiencing FOMO are just hoping for that. Tech will continue to be extremely profit

It’s called a recession. This party isn’t over, these people who have been experiencing FOMO are just hoping for that. Tech will continue to be extremely profitable and innovating industries. That’s not going anywhere. These doom and gloom pieces are comical cringe.

Grimburger 4y ago
And here I was hoping that companies pulling in $20m revenue could continue their multi-billion dollar valuations. An end to absurdly cheap money and all the market distortions it brings will be a good thing in the long run.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
> Tech will continue to be extremely profitable I wonder if that's what people in 1999 though?
- johnisom2001 4y ago
  And it was true. Your poin?
- shazami 4y ago
  They would have been right
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    Long term yes. But short term....
    - decebalus1 4y ago
      ergo a recession, like OP said. As long as you don't need to retire or to liquidate during the recession, you should be fine.
    - lmarcos 4y ago
      For those who didn't experience the dot com bubble: how long did it last? I remember that I was studying computer science in university back in 2005, and everyone agreed in that time that that was a career with future. I knew some software engineers back then who were making good money and jobs (although not as much demanded as nowadays) weren't scarce precisely.
      - monkeybutton 4y ago
        I started studying computer science in 2007 and professors were remarking that it was the first year enrollment was back up pre-dotcom bubble levels. Edit: there's probably some rough times coming for the glut of coding boot camps and learn to code MOOCs.
        ghaff 4y ago
        Enrollment probably lagged recovery a bit. Without studying graphs and so forth, I'd say things were getting back to a fairly even keel by 2004 or so in general. >learn to code MOOCs The VC phase of MOOCs and any great hopes for rethinking education access already pretty much flamed out. What's left is an often good and inexpensive educational resource but it's not much of a business anyway for the most part.
      - evouga 4y ago
        I graduated ‘07. Computer science was seen as a reasonable, but sub-optimal, career path in terms of money and job opportunities. If you were optimizing for career you did pre-med. The CS classes were small (30 students) and consisted of people who were passionate about the field irrespective of making less money than doctors or other engineers. Today the same school has huge classes (300 students) and many don’t have much talent or passion for the subject, but have been told that “people who want good jobs do CS.” It’s true new pre-med, in other words.
        aeonik 4y ago
        I graduated from highschool at this time and I checked the Bureau of Labor Statistics in order to help pick my degree. Computer disciplines and health disciplines dominated the top 10 most projected growth and top salaries at the time. If I recall correctly, "Computer Systems Analyst" was one on the top of the computer-related jobs.
- gonzo41 4y ago
  Dotcom crash and then 9/11, it would have been wild to be in the heart of it at that time.
  - akhmatova 4y ago
    It was pretty boring, actually. And no, you don't want to go back to the tooling and processor speeds of that time.
    - kaidon 4y ago
      Mmmm... getting flashbacks working on Java (generics just came out!) BEA WebLogic projects in Eclipse on Windows XP, configuring cruise control for our ant builds on some ancient Dell desktop in a closet. Honestly, some things have changed, while others have stayed very similar.
      - gonzo41 4y ago
        Everything you've mentioned I've had to support. The horrors of the past echo forward as business critical apps that know one really knows anymore.
  - ben174 4y ago
    Covid will be 1000x more impactful when looking back at the two events.
    - bigDinosaur 4y ago
      Maybe, but 9/11 had profound consequences which I don't think we fully appreciate yet. For example, you can trace some of Putin's thinking (apparently) to the US response to 9/11 in terms of security and the hypocrisy of the West. Contrast the effect of the Spanish Flu: it's just...not really considered important compared to what came a few years after. Covid may well be similar. We will see I suppose.
- encoderer 4y ago
  No. Tech was not profitable back then. The only companies running at a profit then were the earlier generation of tech - oracle, adobe, Microsoft. Etc.
  - cudgy 4y ago
    How did you reach this conclusion?
    - effingwewt 4y ago
      Yea it was utter busllshit. This is all deja vu. Last bubble it was web design that overpaid and websites selling for ridiculous sums. Now it's programmers who are overpaid and in demand flavor of the day. BSG- 'all this has happened before, and all this will happen again'
    - encoderer 4y ago
      The short answer is that I lived through it. But here’s a reference. Notice the tech companies. https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/full/1999/ https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/f...
atwebb 4y ago
I have no idea what is going to happen (like everyone else), what I think is going to happen is that we'll get some more innovation and cool companies/products. As layoffs or attrition happen, a subset of those people are going to do something else, they are going to innovate and compete with the places they left (since they carry good working knowledge of problems and solutions). Companies started from ~2009-2014 did very, very well recently. That's the optimist in me, the pessimist says it is over forever and everything is screwed always. Probably some middle ground somewhere...
jollybean 4y ago
Says Henry Ford? It's 'comical' to think that an industry that sprouted up in the last 20 years will continue to be expansive and profitable ad nauseaum. The biggest funds raised are now in Crypto - a segment that so far has created nothing useful at all. Still giant experiments buyoed by Ponzi/MLM sentiment. There is no value creation. I think it still makes a lot of sense because Fintech/global currency represents 'real opportunity' and we haven't really seen it yet. But money as the root of all power, is inherently the type of thing to be regulated for good reason. Regulations cause ugly bureaucracy and regulatory capture - but - really, regulation is necessary. And that doesn't work well with Silicon Valley types. AI is going to be a big deal, but will be hard to profit from directly. I don't think the future is as bright for the Valley as it was in the past. I see an inflection point of lesser returns in the future.
candiddevmike 4y ago
It's extremely profitable because of advertising and lax data privacy laws. If we get a recession AND stricter data privacy laws, tech will tank.
- germinalphrase 4y ago
  Maybe that’s good. Clear out the unprofitable and invasive underbrush. Move that talent in other directions.
- bluepizza 4y ago
  I think you are selecting a small subset of tech for your argument. For example: - Apple is the one driving stronger privacy, and Apple is tech. - Microsoft would actually get on my good side if they stopped with their telemetry and ads fuckery on Windows. If they lost all of their ad revenue today, they would still be producing cloud products, Windows, Office, Xboxes, etc. - The reason why Netflix has lost momentum is because several other competitors built their own streaming platforms. All tech stacks, driven by cloud platforms. - Amazon will still have their cloud platform, and their store, and their shop platform. Tougher regulation won’t remove Amazon’s edge on cloud technologies, warehouses, and logistics. - Traditional tech companies, such as Oracle, IBM, HP, and similars won’t be affected at all by tightening of privacy. - Heck, even Salesforce has its edge on corporate customers and B2B, and wouldn’t feel that much of a hit. Tech is much, much more than Meta and Google. Google can still push ads based on search queries and webpage content anyway, without violating privacy. So your argument is essentially about Meta. And that’s true, Meta is under risk. And that’s a good thing. They have created a lot of damage and need to correct their products.
  - candiddevmike 4y ago
    Every tech company you listed has some kind of ad-based revenue. They're all data vacuums, and a lot of their current and especially future value is tied to how much user data they have access to and how they can monetize it further. You ever hear the phrase data is the new oil?
    - 4y ago
29athrowaway 4y ago

Grimburger 4y ago

And here I was hoping that companies pulling in $20m revenue could continue their multi-billion dollar valuations. An end to absurdly cheap money and all the market distortions it brings will be a good thing in the long run.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

> Tech will continue to be extremely profitable I wonder if that's what people in 1999 though?

johnisom2001 4y ago
And it was true. Your poin?
shazami 4y ago
They would have been right
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Long term yes. But short term....
  - decebalus1 4y ago
    ergo a recession, like OP said. As long as you don't need to retire or to liquidate during the recession, you should be fine.
  - lmarcos 4y ago
    For those who didn't experience the dot com bubble: how long did it last? I remember that I was studying computer science in university back in 2005, and everyone agreed in that time that that was a career with future. I knew some software engineers back then who were making good money and jobs (although not as much demanded as nowadays) weren't scarce precisely.
    - monkeybutton 4y ago
      I started studying computer science in 2007 and professors were remarking that it was the first year enrollment was back up pre-dotcom bubble levels. Edit: there's probably some rough times coming for the glut of coding boot camps and learn to code MOOCs.
      - ghaff 4y ago
        Enrollment probably lagged recovery a bit. Without studying graphs and so forth, I'd say things were getting back to a fairly even keel by 2004 or so in general. >learn to code MOOCs The VC phase of MOOCs and any great hopes for rethinking education access already pretty much flamed out. What's left is an often good and inexpensive educational resource but it's not much of a business anyway for the most part.
    - evouga 4y ago
      I graduated ‘07. Computer science was seen as a reasonable, but sub-optimal, career path in terms of money and job opportunities. If you were optimizing for career you did pre-med. The CS classes were small (30 students) and consisted of people who were passionate about the field irrespective of making less money than doctors or other engineers. Today the same school has huge classes (300 students) and many don’t have much talent or passion for the subject, but have been told that “people who want good jobs do CS.” It’s true new pre-med, in other words.
      - aeonik 4y ago
        I graduated from highschool at this time and I checked the Bureau of Labor Statistics in order to help pick my degree. Computer disciplines and health disciplines dominated the top 10 most projected growth and top salaries at the time. If I recall correctly, "Computer Systems Analyst" was one on the top of the computer-related jobs.
gonzo41 4y ago
Dotcom crash and then 9/11, it would have been wild to be in the heart of it at that time.
- akhmatova 4y ago
  It was pretty boring, actually. And no, you don't want to go back to the tooling and processor speeds of that time.
  - kaidon 4y ago
    Mmmm... getting flashbacks working on Java (generics just came out!) BEA WebLogic projects in Eclipse on Windows XP, configuring cruise control for our ant builds on some ancient Dell desktop in a closet. Honestly, some things have changed, while others have stayed very similar.
    - gonzo41 4y ago
      Everything you've mentioned I've had to support. The horrors of the past echo forward as business critical apps that know one really knows anymore.
- ben174 4y ago
  Covid will be 1000x more impactful when looking back at the two events.
  - bigDinosaur 4y ago
    Maybe, but 9/11 had profound consequences which I don't think we fully appreciate yet. For example, you can trace some of Putin's thinking (apparently) to the US response to 9/11 in terms of security and the hypocrisy of the West. Contrast the effect of the Spanish Flu: it's just...not really considered important compared to what came a few years after. Covid may well be similar. We will see I suppose.
encoderer 4y ago
No. Tech was not profitable back then. The only companies running at a profit then were the earlier generation of tech - oracle, adobe, Microsoft. Etc.
- cudgy 4y ago
  How did you reach this conclusion?
  - effingwewt 4y ago
    Yea it was utter busllshit. This is all deja vu. Last bubble it was web design that overpaid and websites selling for ridiculous sums. Now it's programmers who are overpaid and in demand flavor of the day. BSG- 'all this has happened before, and all this will happen again'
  - encoderer 4y ago
    The short answer is that I lived through it. But here’s a reference. Notice the tech companies. https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/full/1999/ https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/f...

atwebb 4y ago

I have no idea what is going to happen (like everyone else), what I think is going to happen is that we'll get some more innovation and cool companies/products. As layoffs or attrition happen, a subset of those people are going to do something else, they are going to innovate and compete with the places they left (since they carry good working knowledge of problems and solutions). Companies started from ~2009-2014 did very, very well recently. That's the optimist in me, the pessimist says it is over forever and everything is screwed always. Probably some middle ground somewhere...

jollybean 4y ago

Says Henry Ford? It's 'comical' to think that an industry that sprouted up in the last 20 years will continue to be expansive and profitable ad nauseaum. The biggest funds raised are now in Crypto - a segment that so far has created nothing useful at all. Still giant experiments buyoed by Ponzi/MLM sentiment. There is no value creation. I think it still makes a lot of sense because Fintech/global currency represents 'real opportunity' and we haven't really seen it yet. But money as the root of all power, is inherently the type of thing to be regulated for good reason. Regulations cause ugly bureaucracy and regulatory capture - but - really, regulation is necessary. And that doesn't work well with Silicon Valley types. AI is going to be a big deal, but will be hard to profit from directly. I don't think the future is as bright for the Valley as it was in the past. I see an inflection point of lesser returns in the future.

candiddevmike 4y ago

It's extremely profitable because of advertising and lax data privacy laws. If we get a recession AND stricter data privacy laws, tech will tank.

germinalphrase 4y ago
Maybe that’s good. Clear out the unprofitable and invasive underbrush. Move that talent in other directions.
bluepizza 4y ago
I think you are selecting a small subset of tech for your argument. For example: - Apple is the one driving stronger privacy, and Apple is tech. - Microsoft would actually get on my good side if they stopped with their telemetry and ads fuckery on Windows. If they lost all of their ad revenue today, they would still be producing cloud products, Windows, Office, Xboxes, etc. - The reason why Netflix has lost momentum is because several other competitors built their own streaming platforms. All tech stacks, driven by cloud platforms. - Amazon will still have their cloud platform, and their store, and their shop platform. Tougher regulation won’t remove Amazon’s edge on cloud technologies, warehouses, and logistics. - Traditional tech companies, such as Oracle, IBM, HP, and similars won’t be affected at all by tightening of privacy. - Heck, even Salesforce has its edge on corporate customers and B2B, and wouldn’t feel that much of a hit. Tech is much, much more than Meta and Google. Google can still push ads based on search queries and webpage content anyway, without violating privacy. So your argument is essentially about Meta. And that’s true, Meta is under risk. And that’s a good thing. They have created a lot of damage and need to correct their products.
- candiddevmike 4y ago
  Every tech company you listed has some kind of ad-based revenue. They're all data vacuums, and a lot of their current and especially future value is tied to how much user data they have access to and how they can monetize it further. You ever hear the phrase data is the new oil?
  - 4y ago

29athrowaway 4y ago