Showing posts with label Marc Andreessen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marc Andreessen. Show all posts

Saturday, September 12, 2026

Why Tech Oligarchs Are Willing to Risk Apocalypse; The New York Times, September 12, 2026

MICHELLE GOLDBERG, The New York Times; Why Tech Oligarchs Are Willing to Risk Apocalypse

"In 2023, the billionaire tech investor Marc Andreessen published “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto,” with a section titled, “Becoming Technological Supermen.” In it, he borrowed language from the Italian futurist — and fascist — Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, writing, “Technology must be a violent assault on the forces of the unknown, to force them to bow before man.” He quoted Friedrich Nietzsche to argue that absent such an assault, life becomes meaningless and small. In a section titled “The Enemy,” Andreessen listed ideas that would restrain technology’s momentum, including “tech ethics” and the concept of “existential risk.”

Part of the reason the public has turned so quickly and decisively against A.I. is the bizarre mismatch between the costs they’re being asked to bear and the rewards they expect to receive. Data centers blight the landscape, A.I. slop degrades the culture, chatbots help kids cheat in school and sometimes drive people mad, and technology executives prophesy mass joblessness. For this, ordinary people get improved search engines and help writing emails. Great benefits could be on the horizon — we are constantly assured that A.I. will enable huge medical advances — but they’re not here yet to justify the hazards.

For those most invested in A.I., though, the intolerable risk lies in failing to advance the technology, and thus being confined to stultifying, finite ordinary existence. “For decades, large tech firms have insisted that the technologies they own and control are ‘inevitable’ and thus unstoppable,” write Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor in their trenchant new book, “End Times Fascism.” “Now they increasingly claim the authority of the supernatural: the right to usher in a new stage of human evolution, governed by deities of their creation.” As Klein and Taylor point out, these visions, so obviously derived from sci-fi and video games, can be hard to take seriously. But it doesn’t matter whether you believe in a future of cybernetic ascendence. The point is that the people driving the A.I. revolution do.

And if things go wrong, they have backup plans."

Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Why Do People Like Elon Musk Love Donald Trump? It’s Not Just About Money.; The New York Times, September 25, 2024

Chris Hughes, The New York Times; Why Do People Like Elon Musk Love Donald Trump? It’s Not Just About Money.

"Mr. Trump appeals to some Silicon Valley elites because they identify with the man. To them, he is a fellow victim of the state, unjustly persecuted for his bold ideas. Practically, he is also the shield they need to escape accountability. Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms and spread disinformation; he could even set off a recession, but he won’t challenge their ability to build the technology they like, no matter the social cost...

As much as they want to influence Mr. Trump’s policies, they also want to strike back at the Biden-Harris administration, which they believe has unfairly targeted their industry.

More than any other administration in the internet era, President Biden and Ms. Harris have pushed tech companies toward serving the public interest...

Last year, Mr. Andreessen, whose venture capital firm is heavily invested in crypto, wrote a widely discussed “manifesto” claiming that enemy voices of “bureaucracy, vetocracy, gerontocracy” are opposed to the “pursuit of technology, abundance and life.” In a barely concealed critique of the Biden-Harris administration, he argued that those who believe in carefully assessing the impact of new technologies before adopting them are “deeply immoral.”

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Facebook ‘colonialism' row stokes distrust in Zuckerberg; BBC News, 2/11/16

Dave Lee, BBC News; Facebook ‘colonialism' row stokes distrust in Zuckerberg:
"The suggestion by Andreessen that India, with its history, should somehow be pro-colonialism was treated by many as absurd.
In centuries gone by, colonialism was about exploitation of resources. In the modern world, it's digital - moving in, setting up companies and building insurmountable user bases before any other company can.
That's arguably an extreme interpretation of the purpose of Free Basics - but it's the argument made by local businesses to India's telecoms regulator. An Indian social network wouldn't stand a chance against free Facebook, they said, and websites that are not part of the Free Basics scheme would lose out. The regulator agreed when it ruled in favour of net neutrality.
As did many Western onlookers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which campaigns for an open internet, said Facebook was doing what it could to open up the Free Basics scheme to local companies, the inherent flaw of the program was that Facebook remained the sole gatekeeper."