2 ms·

You seem to be under some misguided notion that someone like Paul Krugman wouldn't be and could not remain relevant without substack. The man is in his 70s and

You seem to be under some misguided notion that someone like Paul Krugman wouldn't be and could not remain relevant without substack. The man is in his 70s and had what most would consider a successful career (that he retired from) and he continues to have significant following of his writing, the idea that substack is somehow a requisite for this is laughable. If Marc Andreessen wants to fund a platform that enables and allows people to call him out on his fascistic bullshit and insane disconnect with humanity, it seems like a trap to say people shouldn't use it to do just that.

vessenes 11mo ago
Nope. I’m just saying Krugman’s substack is likely by percentage currently his primary revenue source. In fact it’s what makes substack a great platform - unlike medium which came before it and ad networks which came before that - substack gives a large percent of the value directly to content creators. And it’s seen as valuable by people from all over the political spectrum, from Tabibi to Krugman. And I think people should go ahead and take the piss all they want, but crucially, when they are as credentialed as Krugman, if they do it in an uninformed way, it is great to call them on it. Bite the hand that feeds by all means, but some intellectual integrity about whether or not has beens like a16z provide any value to the world should be expected.