Technology

A CEO can be good. But a CEO with public shareholders has no choice.

I'm not saying that most CEOs aren't bastards but it's not necessary to be in the position or compete. But when you have public shareholders they are going to demand that you take every dollar through whatever means possible.

Copying and pasting something I said elsewhere just the other day, because it fits:

However, I do think it’s also cultural in the tech companies. The modern tech culture was borne from an attitude that was 100% rooted in “well the law says we can’t do this, so we’ll do this instead, which is different on a technical and legal level, but achieves the same end-result.”

This was heavily evident in early piracy, which went from centralized servers of Napster and Kazaa to the decentralized nature of Bittorrent entirely in response to civil suits for piracy. It was an arms race. Soon enough the copyright holders responded by hiring third parties to hide in torrent swarms to be able to log IPs and hit people “associated” with those IPs with suits for sharing trivial amounts of copyrighted data with the third party. That was responded to with private trackers, and eventually, streaming.

Each step was a technical response to an attempt by society to legally regulate them. Just find a new technical way that’s not regulated yet!

The modern tech companies never lost that ethos of giving technical responses to route around new legal regulation. Which, in itself, is further enabled by capitalism, as you astutely pointed out.

This isn't meant to be an indictment against regular ass people and internet piracy, but it's more about pointing out the leaders in the tech industry at large have always had a similar mindset to the pirates. That their response to attempted regulation of their industry has always been to ignore the spirit of the regulation and attempt to achieve the same result through technically wonkery as opposed to legal wonkery.

I mean, you don't have to look farther than Sean Parker from Napster. Guy still has oodles of money and connections from running what amounted to an illegal business model at the time. He's still heavily involved in lots of major tech groups with oodles of money.

You're just not dealing with rational or good faith actors if their response to any attempt to reign them in is to avoid the attempt to be reigned in by changing how the tech works.

Tom from MySpace really is the nicest guy on this list...he was my first friend on there! 😎

Leaders in tech have to be good at raising money from rich investors, lenders, etc.. Most of these people aren't tech people. They're hedge fund managers, bankers, or just people with lots of money. So consider the following 2 strategies:

Strategy A: Be realistic. Explain the positives and the negatives. The tech looks promising, but the future is uncertain. It's a risky investment that could pay off massively, but it probably won't. You the CEO know a lot about the topic, but you're still just a guy, not a miracle worker.

Strategy B: Just focus on the plus side. It will succeed, and it'll succeed way more than anyone expects. Not only that, you the CEO are an unstoppable hardworking galaxy brain genius who sleeps on the factory floor. They should be so lucky to get to invest in your company.

Which of these is more likely to work with investors who don't know tech? And which is most likely to be the strategy chosen by leaders who are narcissistic and deceitful? The answer is the same.

OK. Listen. These people are damn smart at what they do. Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos.

I have to deal with people every day that cannot do anything other than watch Fox News, News Max, and News Nation.

The above named people are taking advantage of people like that.

That's all i have to say.

It's not just tech, but leadership positions in general.

Short answer is that the traits you need to climb the ladder have significant overlap with the traits of legit psychopathy.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/mind-of-the-manager/201304/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership

Gates was always a dirtbag.

He is one of the main reasons proprietary software is so prevalent and predatory nowadays.

I remember when I was growing up,

You remember propaganda (when corporations do it, it's called "Public Relations").

That's what you remember. Now, thanks to the internet democratizign information somewhat, they don't just get to feed us their "public relations" anymore. Now people can counter that shit, and people see them for what they really are - parasites.

It's capitalism, baby. Welcome to the real world.

Resources and influence will always drunkard's-walk into the hands of the unscrupulous and manipulative, pretty much by definition.

They're going to be drawn to it, they'll fight dirtier for it, and they'll use the power it gives them to prevent anyone else from taking it away.

Big Tech is a huge source of both, so it would be amazing if the people on top of the heap weren't massive piles of shit.

This is okay but my post about AI is not? Same as reddit 😔.

They all have a story like this. They are all terrible.

I think Gareth Reynolds said it or was it Jordan from knowledge fight? But once you reach a billion you should get a medal saying you won capitalism then be 100% taxed the rest of your life.

If you think Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were good for the world then I don't know what to tell you.

Businesses succeed by profiting. The most successful businesses of any time period are ones who maximise profits at all costs, including ethics.

There are a lot of arguments about more ethical businesses being the most viable longterm, but that sort of variable isn't considered when the big businesses calculate their next move.

Almost none of the Tech Company leaders actually finished college, if somebody you know is calling them a genius then that person measures intelligence by profits. A very stupid person.

One word - capitalism. It favours master-slave model

The good ones retire or have important, but not the most profitable/public facing jobs.

The other Apple Steve, Steve Wozniak founded the EFF and was the tech guy at early Apple. Jobs was the business guy.

John Carmack is a controversial figure, but he's actually the tech wiz kid the techbros dream they are. He seems to just be interested in pushing technology and had some choice words for Meta when he left. They should have let him have his axe to carry around.

It's better to assume good humans don't exist, they just haven't shown (to you) their bad side yet

Well first of all, I don't personally think evil even exists.

Secondly, I don't think these people are any more or less "evil" than the rest of us. They just operate on a much larger scale that affects many more people. If any of us normal folk would be put under equivalent level of scrutiny as these guys with journalists combing thru our every social media post and paparazzis following us around combined with the intention to dig up dirt and contribute to the negative narrative that sells better than a positive one, we'd all look like them. Most people don't like Gates, Musk or Zuck because that's the conclusion they've independently arrived at. It's how they've been told to think by the media.

They still exist and they're just as unheard of as the unsung heroes who brought us the digital revolution of the 20th century.

Alan Turing, Dennis Ritchie, Ken Thompson, Gary Kildall, the list goes on. At least Torvalds and Stallman got some recognition for what they did within there respective communities, even if the latter is a bit of a creep.

All of those people where far more important to computing, and far less famous. Just like how no one really thinks about the developers holding up the open source projects which function as the bedrock of our modern society. They're more interested in company heads than actual technologists, or more accurate, that's what the people in power are more interested in.

Actual engineers tend to have pesky things like morals and ethics.

Because sociopathic tenancies are useful when on your way to the top. It lets you step on everyone else in your way and then do whatever you want without having to care about others.

you either die a hero or live long enough to see your self become a villain