4 ms·

This was a good read. When I first read Andreessen's manifesto, I came to believe that one of the following must be true: 1. Andreessen is literally unwell - i

This was a good read. When I first read Andreessen's manifesto, I came to believe that one of the following must be true: 1. Andreessen is literally unwell - it reminded me of the paranoid tendencies that reared their head in 2 of my grandparents in the early/mid stages of dementia. 2. Being a billionaire can actually be so isolating, and you constantly have people blowing sunshine up your ass, that you actually start to believe that all your ideas are infallible and that anyone not in agreement with you is a worthless peon. I mean, even if you agreed with Andreessen's point of view, presumably he wrote and posted that manifesto to persuade, as a call-to-action. Yet I don't see how anyone could read that (or write that) and not see how the blowback would be intense, and it's had the exact opposite effect of the (presumed) intent. Of course, Andreessen could just be a collosal "rules for thee but not for me" asshole. He was crowing about free markets and "liberating" people, and about how "it's time to build", but he and his wife turned out to be the ultimate NIMBYs when it was actually their backyard: 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...

rqtwteye 3y ago
"but he and his wife turned out to be the ultimate NIMBYs when it was actually their backyard: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre..." This episode is all you need to know about Andreesen. Disruption is only good for others.
- hermitcrab 3y ago
  That link seems to be broken.
  - saghm 3y ago
    It seems like it got truncated when they copied it. Plugging it into google, I think I found the full link: 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...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
garbanz0 3y ago
I only skimmed the manifesto, but I didn't see much about paranoia, infallibility, "worthless peons," nothing like that. It basically just said markets and progress are good, collectivism and stagnation are bad. That, along with his hypocritical NIMBYism, seems pretty standard for bay area techies who are lost in the sauce. I don't agree with a lot of his manifesto. But I wish more people would write manifestos and try to fully explain their worldview instead of spending a lifetime reacting to other people's opinions. It's sad that we think they're inherently pretentious.
- kaycebasques 3y ago
  I like the idea of making it more acceptable / encouraged for people to write manifestos. Do you have one?
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  Here is the very beginning of his manifesto: > Lies > We are being lied to. > We are told that technology takes our jobs, reduces our wages, increases inequality, threatens our health, ruins the environment, degrades our society, corrupts our children, impairs our humanity, threatens our future, and is ever on the verge of ruining everything. > We are told to be angry, bitter, and resentful about technology. > We are told to be pessimistic. In other words, the very first subtitle is "Lies", like it's some evil shadowy cabal that is keeping us from the Truth of techno-utopia (and this isn't just my interpretation - he goes on to specifically name his enemies hit list later). His article felt like it would be way more at home on some rando's "IllumiNaTI!!!" YouTube channel, where the cliche of starting out with an "enemies list" is central to any juicy conspiracy theory. But most importantly, my reaction comes from my experience. I most definitely was a techno-optimist for all my life until about 2012-2015 or so. I believed the initial promises about how the Internet would bring us all closer, and how social media would let me better connect with friends and strangers, about how smart phones would make our lives so much better. So I am just totally baffled that anyone could have lived through that time and not be at least somewhat reflective about "hey, maybe there are some downsides to tech, and maybe this tech disillusionment that so many techies (to say nothing of non-techies) feel is based in something real" unless they are just a completely selfish asshole or totally oblivious to the real, documented harms of tech.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

rqtwteye 3y ago

"but he and his wife turned out to be the ultimate NIMBYs when it was actually their backyard: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/marc-andre..." This episode is all you need to know about Andreesen. Disruption is only good for others.

hermitcrab 3y ago
That link seems to be broken.
- saghm 3y ago
  It seems like it got truncated when they copied it. Plugging it into google, I think I found the full link: 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...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

garbanz0 3y ago

I only skimmed the manifesto, but I didn't see much about paranoia, infallibility, "worthless peons," nothing like that. It basically just said markets and progress are good, collectivism and stagnation are bad. That, along with his hypocritical NIMBYism, seems pretty standard for bay area techies who are lost in the sauce. I don't agree with a lot of his manifesto. But I wish more people would write manifestos and try to fully explain their worldview instead of spending a lifetime reacting to other people's opinions. It's sad that we think they're inherently pretentious.

kaycebasques 3y ago
I like the idea of making it more acceptable / encouraged for people to write manifestos. Do you have one?
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
Here is the very beginning of his manifesto: > Lies > We are being lied to. > We are told that technology takes our jobs, reduces our wages, increases inequality, threatens our health, ruins the environment, degrades our society, corrupts our children, impairs our humanity, threatens our future, and is ever on the verge of ruining everything. > We are told to be angry, bitter, and resentful about technology. > We are told to be pessimistic. In other words, the very first subtitle is "Lies", like it's some evil shadowy cabal that is keeping us from the Truth of techno-utopia (and this isn't just my interpretation - he goes on to specifically name his enemies hit list later). His article felt like it would be way more at home on some rando's "IllumiNaTI!!!" YouTube channel, where the cliche of starting out with an "enemies list" is central to any juicy conspiracy theory. But most importantly, my reaction comes from my experience. I most definitely was a techno-optimist for all my life until about 2012-2015 or so. I believed the initial promises about how the Internet would bring us all closer, and how social media would let me better connect with friends and strangers, about how smart phones would make our lives so much better. So I am just totally baffled that anyone could have lived through that time and not be at least somewhat reflective about "hey, maybe there are some downsides to tech, and maybe this tech disillusionment that so many techies (to say nothing of non-techies) feel is based in something real" unless they are just a completely selfish asshole or totally oblivious to the real, documented harms of tech.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]