4 ms·
> the author’s perception has shifted, and as such their perception of humanity has shifted with it I think your comment is largely anecdotal and is actually g
by skytreader 4y ago
> the author’s perception has shifted, and as such their perception of humanity has shifted with it
I think your comment is largely anecdotal and is actually guilty of the very thing you are accusing the author of.
For instance...
> I think it is possible that “tech entrepreneur” as a monolithic “cool” category only ever existed inside the minds of that same group.
So, in my very personal opinion, the Best Time Ever to be in tech was in the 2010-2015 era, peaking at around 2012-2013. And in my recollection, that time, being in tech (which I'm loosely interchanging with the author's "be[ing] a tech entrepreneur") was seen as in-vogue even by people outside the industry. My less-anecdotal proof to back this claim is that it was around this time when public figures---politicians, no less---would advocate learning how to code/integrating a bit more CS in basic education.
We were disruptors. We were supposed to change the world. Until we weren't. We are, apparently, the old guard in fancy new clothes. We aren't here to make the world more open and more connected but to capture consumer groups in walled gardens, so that the best buyer can set a price on their data.
> recent events has unveiled some sort of new or previously hidden disdain for self-described tech entrepreneurs.
I really don't think recent events are unveiling any kind of disdain so much as adding another black spot to a long laundry list. The bucket already has water and everyone is just watching for the drop that makes it overflow.
> (It's B)
Again, I don't think you can just make the claim without showing some kind of proof (and having used the term "intended audience" I think comes with word-of-Judge level burden of proof) or explaining how you came to that conclusion.
For starters, I find it disingenuous to divide people like this. Even in my 2010-2015 era (which was also the show's heyday), A and B had a considerable intersection. There's nothing ever stopping you from participating in an industry you are critical about.
In my experience, even people squarely in the A category enjoyed the show just as much as people in the B category, some maybe for the wrong reasons. Arguably, not all in the A category found it amusing but I think that has more to do with whether you can joke about yourself than any sentiment you harbor about the tech industry and SV culture.
- braingenious 4y ago>I think your comment is largely anecdotal Ok, sure! Let’s see what non-anec >So, in my very personal opinion, the Best Time Ever to be in tech was in the 2010-2015 era -dotal bit of data are you going to use >We were disruptors. We were supposed to change the world. to disagree with my >I really don't think recent events are unveiling any kind of disdain so much as adding another black spot to a long laundry list. point? As for >explaining how you came to that conclusion. Group B is a superset that includes group A! If you are certain that you’ve proven otherwise, I won’t personally be reaching out to Mr. Judge, but anecdotally I suspect that more people watched it than were in the tech industry.
- skytreader 4y agoYou cherry-picked my comment to ignore my efforts at less-anecdotal proof. It was very much the zeitgeist to advocate for teaching computer programming back in the era I specified to encourage children to be in tech: 2014: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/226287-largest-school-districts-vow-computer-science-classes-wh-says/ https://thehill.com/policy/technology/226287-largest-school-... 2015: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/256385-chicago-mayor-calls-for-national-computer-coding-requirement/ https://thehill.com/policy/technology/256385-chicago-mayor-c... > Group B is a superset that includes group A! Come on now, you can't make that claim without clown make-up on. If B is a superset of A, what's the point of your distinction then? ~You just made a stronger claim than mine; now you are also saying _everyone_ in A liked the show too.~ (EDIT: OK, as @defrost pointed out below, your claim is about intended audience rather than people liking the show. But doesn't change my view that asserting B is a superset of A makes your distinction pointless. Nor that using the term intended audience actually carries some burden of proof with it.) Here's a picture of a superset to aid comprehension: +-------------------+ | Set B | | +---------------+ | | | Set A | | | +---------------+ | +-------------------+
- defrost 4y agoSpecifically they claimed that everybody in A formed part of the intended audience. There was no assertation that anybody in A even liked the show let alone watched it. ( Although judging by the /r/SiliconValley subreddit (or whatever it was called) at least a few tech workers enjoyed the show )
- braingenious 4y agoI am glad that you so emphatically agree with me? Assuming that one’s perspective on what constitutes “the zeitgeist” is anecdotal and personal?