5 ms·
Looking at these comments, I can't think of another VC that has burned as much goodwill among technical people as a16z has. Don't get me wrong, it's well deserv
by ryanSrich 3y ago
Looking at these comments, I can't think of another VC that has burned as much goodwill among technical people as a16z has. Don't get me wrong, it's well deserved, but it's just surprising how universal it seems to be (at least in this thread).
- whimsicalism 3y agoe: Removing because I think this is distracting from the main conversation & potentially flamebait.
- ChatGTP 3y agoWhy do you think that is ?
- superzamp 3y agoNow that we have good language models, it would be great to see what would a quantitative analysis of this perceived increase in ressentiment actually lands as results. I lean on agreeing with your comment, but also curious to see if we're both hallucinating.
- bluefishinit 3y agoWouldn't a more reasonable explanation be that a16z destroyed their brand through years of questionable investments, excessive hype, cringe inducing behavior and being very obnoxious, very publicly. Also not a fan of their push to "American Exceptionalism" aka weapons dealing and mass surveillance.
- whimsicalism 3y agoSure, except for the fact that I see this same trend of very young accounts making very negative comments for any sort of successful new tech trend.
- bluefishinit 3y agoI don't think anyone here is commenting on the AI trend, they're commenting on a16z.
- whimsicalism 3y agoRight, I am making a comment about the overall tenor of the website, which requires looking at multiple threads. You're saying "No, they just really hate a16z" and I'm saying huh, it is interesting that all of the threads on new technology, whether it is LLMs or crypto or whatever, tend to have people who "really hate [xyz]". Honestly, it speaks to the magnitude of the LLM breakthrough that HN is at least mixed on that topic.
- bluefishinit 3y agoFwiw I'm a huge fan of LLMs and not a fan at all of a16z for the reasons I stated. I think you're reading too much into this thread.
- whimsicalism 3y agoIf you actually joined the website 13 days ago though, I'm not sure if you are really in a position to evaluate the shift in culture over years timespan?
- criley2 3y agoLot of talking down to new users coming from a 3 year old account on a website that's been up for 15+ years. This site would be better if users like you read and followed their own advice.
- whimsicalism 3y agoI'm not talking down, in fact I think it is likely they have either been lurking for much longer than they've had an account or this is not their first account. That's the case for me, for instance. There's no higher "status" or anything to be gained on how long you spend on this silly site, I just think it is relevant to the specific conversation.
- cguess 3y agoa16z have always been sleazy, and their entire crypto/NFT run just proved it further. Their hook towards AI the moment the NFT/Crypto market started crashing shows how little they believe their own bullshit. I don't have a problem with people getting wealthy, I have a problem with a16z because they did it by pushing crypto scams on normal, everyday, people by convincing the world it was the future while knowing full well it was shit all the way down. Now they're trying to to do it again. AI is important, but it's simply not the "all things will be different in six week, so invest now or get left behind!" that they're doing.
- digging 3y agoThat seems unrelated to the issue at hand, which is that people have specific grievances with a16z
- whimsicalism 3y agoI don't deny that, what I am saying is that a broader 'grievance culture' has arisen in HN that previously was much more muted.
- rchaud 3y agoHave a look at HN threads on topics like corporate diversity, women in tech, or H1B visas. One man's 'objective critique' is going to be another man's 'grievance culture'. In any case, A16z attracts more dislike because their image is that of influencers and hype men. You won't see the same dislike of Kleiner Perkins or others because they keep a low public profile.
- jfoster 3y agoI wouldn't say you're entirely wrong about that trend, but that is clearly not why a16z is facing criticism here. What is large or successful about their crypto currency, web3 or nft endeavors?
- solarkraft 3y agoI've been here for a few years longer than that and haven't observed that trend. Feels like it's always been that way to me. Seems to me like it goes all the way back to that Dropbox comment.
- whimsicalism 3y agoI was thinking about the Dropbox comment actually as emblematic of the sort of current I was thinking of, but one that I perceive as growing larger. It might be bias on my part - I work in deep NLP and maybe I'm just feeling the heat there for the first time.
- disgruntledphd2 3y agoSpeaking as someone who worked for FB for five years, it really sucks when people seem to hate the thing that you're in to.
- rchaud 3y agoWhy should that matter? They are not addressing you personally. Look at all the negative posts about Google, Youtube and ads. Do you think the adtech engineer visitng HN cares one iota?
- disgruntledphd2 3y agoDunno, all I was saying is that it was more difficult for me than a regular visit to HN. It actually made me a _lot_ more sceptical of the average commenter on things I didn't know anything about.
- sanxiyn 3y agoThey do. (Source: talked to Google adtech engineers.)
- akira2501 3y agoMy take is the opposite. Hacker News has turned increasingly away from Hackers and more towards Marketing. Understandably, some of us resent the apparent astrotufing of this site and react accordingly.
- jhp123 3y agoI'm inclined to agree that the vibe has shifted a bit. HN users have always shown a lot of hostility towards certain groups, like journalists, politicians and financiers. VCs, founders and tech executives were more often seen as part of the in-group. I think the explanation is simple: many HN users are tech employees, and they've had a rude awakening with recent layoffs as to who is the master and who the slave.
- avgcorrection 3y agoIt’s so easy to throw out meta-commentary and to pscyholigize[1] people based on a single prompt that you then don’t even have to defend (“people are reading this as more of a[...]”). Oh, were a16z good or bad, or neutral? Uh, doesn’t matter as long as I get to express my little pet-peeve. [1] Using “ressentiment” is on the level of accusing someone of having father/mother issues (the Freud variant).
- bsder 3y agoCrypto. Folks like Andreesen pissed off all sides. The "crypto true believers" are pissed off because they got extracted like the pyramid scheme players they were. The "crypto is a scam" people are pissed off because it was bloody obvious that it was a pyramid scheme and these people are getting off scot free while the plebians take it in the shorts. And the crypto pyramid players got pissed because the big boys have the money to extract the payout better than they do.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoSoftBank. Tiger. There are investors with negative brand value; take their money, but expect it to make future fundraising and business harder.
- ryanSrich 3y agoI think this is going a bit too far. Not a single other VC is going to look at you negatively for raising from a16z.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Not a single other VC is going to look at you negatively for raising from a16z Have seen it directly. Not automatic dismissal. But dismissing the valuation, which puts a founder in down-round territory out of the gate. (Also, questions about naïveté.) We saw similar issues with SoftBank when they were in the late stages of their reputational shredder. It’s similar to the crowdfunding penalty. Is it money? Sure. Does it impact going-forward fundraising prospects? Of course.
- akiselev 3y agoDon't forget Sequoia Capital now too, after the SBF fiasco [1]. Though maybe their reputation hasn't quite reached the gutter yet. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20221109050305/https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlight/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221109050305/https://www.sequo...
- rchaud 3y agoIt's because Andreessen is the HN reader's ideal VC, on paper. He is (was?) highly technical, he built a very successful product with Netscape. He also came of age during the first tech bubble and in theory should be able to see through the BS. Yet nearly every public statement he's made since becoming a full-time VC has been about pumping the worst companies and claiming they're the future. Airbnb, WeWork, a metric f'ton of crypto startups. It's almost painful watching the inventor of Netscape trying to postulate to Tyler Cowen how Web3 is the new internet: https://twitter.com/liron/status/1537186589486460928 https://twitter.com/liron/status/1537186589486460928
- CSMastermind 3y agoNot to take anything away from Netscape, I do think there was interesting technical things happening with that browser, but the company never made money. I would go as far as to say their 'real' product was an avenue to attack Microsoft - not the browser they made. They got a lot of money by positioning themselves as an anti-Microsoft vector, had a huge IPO as an unprofitable company during the dot com boom, successfully entrapped Microsoft in an anti-trust case, then got acquired by AOL. Of course I'm not a billionaire and I don't doubt it took a lot of skill to earn that money. I'm just not sure those are the same skills you need to build a profitable business or useful product.
- mixmastamyk 3y agoThey probably would have made money in the medium term, but MS gave their browser away for free. The empire strikes back.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- zht 3y agonot to mention a glance at Andreessen's Twitter reveals someone who is deeply confused about almost everything, with a confidence that I can't seem to figure out the origin of
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]