I clicked on this hoping it would be a deserved indictment of his personal NIMBY views [1] vs public statements. Instead it's basically 3 tweets worth of commen

I clicked on this hoping it would be a deserved indictment of his personal NIMBY views [1] vs public statements. Instead it's basically 3 tweets worth of commentary, and illiterate commentary at that. > Right now, we're watching what happens when risk management and tech ethics are ignored for the sake of unlimited growth, ... Andreessen would bristle at the comparison — his VC firm famously didn't back FTX — but the philosophical slope nonetheless slips in that direction. Besides referencing that it's already a slippery slope argument this is completely unrelated to his complaints about. > 'existential risk', 'sustainability', 'ESG', 'Sustainable Development Goals', 'social responsibility', 'stakeholder capitalism', 'Precautionary Principle', 'trust and safety', 'tech ethics', 'risk management', 'de-growth', 'the limits of growth.'" Notice how fruad isn't listed there. Andreessen's combining 4 to 5 different things that slow down growth. Which isn't great if you think some of them might be net positives but the author's reading comprehension is comically bad. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andreessens-opposition-housing-project-nimby/671061/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre...