4 ms·

[flagged]

louwrentius 4y ago
> VCs, and capitalists in general, put money at risk in the hope of generating wealth above their initial capital. They produce goods or services that benefit society, absent the internet-controlled juice-squeezers. VCs hoarding even more capital doesn't contribute anything to society, they are all 100% rent-seeking juice-squeezers. They are a huge example of why capitalism is so broken. > Society has benefited greatly from capitalism. I wouldn't leave it up to the likes Molly White to produce anything meaningful. Society and the world has been - and continues to be - tremendously damaged by capitalism. But of more interest is the ad hominem against Molly White. I know Molly's work and I'm quite confident that she did a lot more for the world - especially in the crypto space and wikipedia space - than you ever did. See how I can play your game too? The behaviour of Facebook and Google, or Microsoft (in the past) of people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions, especially while 60% of just people in the USA live paycheck to paycheck. To me it's not Venture Captitalism but Vulture Capitalism.
- foverzar 4y ago
  > of people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions Does it really? Honestly, it's hard to take such sentiments seriously when you start mentioning these particular "hype" billionaires. For one, it seems like most spite comes of expecting them to act like some godly idols, instead of like some dudes. But largely, it's just that there are so much worse examples, dealing in so much worse things. You just can't help but wonder if the person actually grasps the scale, or if the whole thing boils down to distaste of someone's character and behavior.
  - louwrentius 4y ago
    > You just can't help but wonder if the person actually grasps the scale, or if the whole thing boils down to distaste of someone's character and behavior. It's not about them as personalities, but what they represent. And their flaws only prove why billionaires should not exist and why they should not have that kind of power.
    - foverzar 4y ago
      > It's not about them as personalities, but what they represent. So... Still personalities since they don't really represent anything but themselves. > And their flaws only prove why billionaires should not exist and why they should not have that kind of power. Their flaws are no worse than yours. And people you've named don't have THAT kind of power. Musk barely scratched a shred of power with twitter but was viciously attacked by people with actual power and quickly shown his place. In any case, your rage should be directed towards someone from the military industrial complex for example - these people actually murdered people and engineered wars in order to get money. Gates, Musk and so on are harmless children in comparison. This basically looks like another variation of rant about holywood/rap-singers/bloggers and their endless flaws that are oh so harmful to otherwise totally functional society. Really treating a serious issue as some kind of joke or a tabloid material.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions You picked the guy who’s curing malaria and the one who kickstarted the modern electric vehicle and rocket industries. Yes, they’re flawed. But all humans are, especially the ambitious. I’m struggling to imagine an alternate system where e.g. they’re in better form as elected representatives.
  - louwrentius 4y ago
    > You picked the guy who’s curing malaria and the one who kickstarted the modern electric vehicle and rocket industries. Yes, they’re flawed. But all humans are, especially the ambitious. I’m struggling to imagine an alternate system where e.g. they’re in better form as elected representatives. You may struggle to imagine an alternate system but others don't. Billionaires should not exist. Relying on billionaires to do good is ludicrous. Tesla was founded by others, Elon bought Tesla. Rocket industries are not good for the environment or our future. We can do mostly without them. Maybe to keep GPS up and running but that's it.
polygamous_bat 4y ago
> VCs, and capitalists in general, put money at risk in the hope of generating wealth above their initial capital. , absent the internet-controlled juice-squeezers. You're so close to getting the point, yet so far. The whole point of the article is that there is nothing in the VC handbook that has anything to do with the "benefits society" part of your "They produce goods or services that benefit society" statement. In fact, if slavery is magically made legal today, I will bet that the Anderssen Horowitzs of this world will fund the Adam Newmanns of this world to start a slave trading startup before the weekend is over. And we need people like Molly White to keep them accountable, to build consensus on what's legal but not moral, and push for a better society where we can live with human dignity.
- breck 4y ago
  We have a form of slavery around today, and it is indeed how most tech billionaires became billionaires: http://www.breckyunits.com/an-unpopular-phrase.html http://www.breckyunits.com/an-unpopular-phrase.html
- RamblingCTO 4y ago
  > In fact, if slavery is magically made legal today Then society deems it ethically ok. You're argument is void. If society thinks things are ok, why are VCs the heavenly instance to rectify that? > And we need people like Molly White to keep them accountable You mean crypto shills will enforce ethics? Lol
  - timmytokyo 4y ago
    Molly White a crypto shill? Her writing career is dominated by crypto skepticism and skewering crypto shills.

[flagged]

> VCs, and capitalists in general, put money at risk in the hope of generating wealth above their initial capital. They produce goods or services that benefit society, absent the internet-controlled juice-squeezers. VCs hoarding even more capital doesn't contribute anything to society, they are all 100% rent-seeking juice-squeezers. They are a huge example of why capitalism is so broken. > Society has benefited greatly from capitalism. I wouldn't leave it up to the likes Molly White to produce anything meaningful. Society and the world has been - and continues to be - tremendously damaged by capitalism. But of more interest is the ad hominem against Molly White. I know Molly's work and I'm quite confident that she did a lot more for the world - especially in the crypto space and wikipedia space - than you ever did. See how I can play your game too? The behaviour of Facebook and Google, or Microsoft (in the past) of people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions, especially while 60% of just people in the USA live paycheck to paycheck. To me it's not Venture Captitalism but Vulture Capitalism.

foverzar 4y ago
> of people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions Does it really? Honestly, it's hard to take such sentiments seriously when you start mentioning these particular "hype" billionaires. For one, it seems like most spite comes of expecting them to act like some godly idols, instead of like some dudes. But largely, it's just that there are so much worse examples, dealing in so much worse things. You just can't help but wonder if the person actually grasps the scale, or if the whole thing boils down to distaste of someone's character and behavior.
- louwrentius 4y ago
  > You just can't help but wonder if the person actually grasps the scale, or if the whole thing boils down to distaste of someone's character and behavior. It's not about them as personalities, but what they represent. And their flaws only prove why billionaires should not exist and why they should not have that kind of power.
  - foverzar 4y ago
    > It's not about them as personalities, but what they represent. So... Still personalities since they don't really represent anything but themselves. > And their flaws only prove why billionaires should not exist and why they should not have that kind of power. Their flaws are no worse than yours. And people you've named don't have THAT kind of power. Musk barely scratched a shred of power with twitter but was viciously attacked by people with actual power and quickly shown his place. In any case, your rage should be directed towards someone from the military industrial complex for example - these people actually murdered people and engineered wars in order to get money. Gates, Musk and so on are harmless children in comparison. This basically looks like another variation of rant about holywood/rap-singers/bloggers and their endless flaws that are oh so harmful to otherwise totally functional society. Really treating a serious issue as some kind of joke or a tabloid material.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> people like Bill Gates and his contemporaries like Elon Musk only show why people should never be allowed to own billions You picked the guy who’s curing malaria and the one who kickstarted the modern electric vehicle and rocket industries. Yes, they’re flawed. But all humans are, especially the ambitious. I’m struggling to imagine an alternate system where e.g. they’re in better form as elected representatives.
- louwrentius 4y ago
  > You picked the guy who’s curing malaria and the one who kickstarted the modern electric vehicle and rocket industries. Yes, they’re flawed. But all humans are, especially the ambitious. I’m struggling to imagine an alternate system where e.g. they’re in better form as elected representatives. You may struggle to imagine an alternate system but others don't. Billionaires should not exist. Relying on billionaires to do good is ludicrous. Tesla was founded by others, Elon bought Tesla. Rocket industries are not good for the environment or our future. We can do mostly without them. Maybe to keep GPS up and running but that's it.

polygamous_bat 4y ago

> VCs, and capitalists in general, put money at risk in the hope of generating wealth above their initial capital. , absent the internet-controlled juice-squeezers. You're so close to getting the point, yet so far. The whole point of the article is that there is nothing in the VC handbook that has anything to do with the "benefits society" part of your "They produce goods or services that benefit society" statement. In fact, if slavery is magically made legal today, I will bet that the Anderssen Horowitzs of this world will fund the Adam Newmanns of this world to start a slave trading startup before the weekend is over. And we need people like Molly White to keep them accountable, to build consensus on what's legal but not moral, and push for a better society where we can live with human dignity.

breck 4y ago
We have a form of slavery around today, and it is indeed how most tech billionaires became billionaires: http://www.breckyunits.com/an-unpopular-phrase.html http://www.breckyunits.com/an-unpopular-phrase.html
RamblingCTO 4y ago
> In fact, if slavery is magically made legal today Then society deems it ethically ok. You're argument is void. If society thinks things are ok, why are VCs the heavenly instance to rectify that? > And we need people like Molly White to keep them accountable You mean crypto shills will enforce ethics? Lol
- timmytokyo 4y ago
  Molly White a crypto shill? Her writing career is dominated by crypto skepticism and skewering crypto shills.