Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Media

Silicon Valley's Loony Cheerleading Culture Is Out of Control 175

Nerval's Lobster writes "Kernel editor-in-chief and noted firebrand Milo Yiannopoulos swings away at Silicon Valley's current startup culture, noting that it's resulted in herds of wannabe founders and startup groupies who don't exactly have a track record of starting successful companies or even producing solid code. 'Though they produce little of value, they are the naive soft power behind aggressive capitalist machines in Silicon Valley: the trend-setting vanguard of the global Web and mobile industries,' he writes. 'We should be very wary indeed of these vacuous cheerleaders whose vague waffle about the transformational potential of photo-sharing apps is more sinister and Orwellian than anything dreamt up by a dictator.' How long can such a culture continue before it dries up, and the whole tech-investment cycle begins anew?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Silicon Valley's Loony Cheerleading Culture Is Out of Control

Comments Filter:
  • Dictator (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @11:00AM (#44696671)

    "the transformational potential of photo-sharing apps is more sinister and Orwellian than anything dreamt up by a dictator."

    Flickr is worse than Hitler? What?

  • They always exist (Score:5, Interesting)

    by EmperorOfCanada ( 1332175 ) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @11:04AM (#44696741)
    In every boom there are con men who see piles of cash and people desperate to invest it. It has always annoyed me when these guys skip in from low-integrity industries like property development, come up with an idea that might even be impossible: "cluster smartphones into supercomputers for small business", round up millions of dollars, have the biggest booths at the local tech conferences, hire up a bunch of dillweeds, rent A+ locations, appear in dozens of self promoting articles "Top 40 under 40", drive around in $90,000 leased cars, and then flame out in a huge way. The only good thing is that when the bankruptcy people liquidate their stuff the stacks of unopened Aeron chairs and the Alienware computers go really cheap.

    The massive downside is that they give a black eye to, or outbid, anyone with a valid product trying to raise money, hire developers, and rent locations.
  • by korbulon ( 2792438 ) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @11:16AM (#44696839)

    They do it because it's hot, new, cool, chic, hip, swag, fly, swank, vogue, and gosh-darnit a whole lotta fun!

    The real legacy of Steve Jobs was to engender feelings of inadequacy in a whole generation of tech bosses. So instead of solid, maybe a little boring, mostly behind-the-scenes approach to technological development, we have everyone and their grandmother trying to emulate the once great king of consumer tech (long live the king!) with dramatic unveiling ceremonies that remind one more of a pop concert than a product release. Frankly, in some cases it's a little embarrassing, because not everyone can pull it off. In fact most people can't. So don't do it because you suck at it. I'm also looking at you, TED.

    When investors realize that new =/= good (and in most cases = shit), then we might finally witness the inevitable implosion and with any luck a healthier restructuring of the tech industry. But until then, thundercats ho!

  • by hsmith ( 818216 ) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @11:24AM (#44696921)
    I am "bootstrapping" my latest venture and we are Doing quite well. But, I simply can't stand to talk to other startups. It is always "how much money we raised" or "how much are you raising" - the conversations never are about how much cash you are making and how many paying customers you have.

    There is a lot of allure to raising money and a lot of back patting, which is why I just can't stand them.
  • Conflicting. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gallondr00nk ( 868673 ) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @12:36PM (#44697629)

    Technology companies have produced remarkably brilliant new opportunities and efficiencies, but they have also raised the specter of lives bled of purpose, of the inhumanity of the new social structures that are emerging. What do we do to keep everyone gainfully occupied when globalization and technological change render the bottom two thirds of society redundant?

    This is a point that I always feel gratified reading, and it really cannot be stated often enough. We are reaching a stage where we simply don't need as many people employed as we used to. Instagram was worth $1 billion when it was bought by Facebook, and it had only 13 employees. Could you imagine thirty years ago any business at all being worth that sort of money with a dozen employees?

    It isn't just web services though, it's the manufacturing and retail / service sectors too. Even down to those obnoxious self checkout machines in supermarkets, which are costing several people a job while at the same time making the customer do more of the work.

    We're already in a position where job creation is lagging population growth. How much worse will it need to get before people actually start discussing this?

    (My pet solution is a guaranteed minimum income, enough to allow people to live comfortably with a decent amount of disposable income.)

  • by pspahn ( 1175617 ) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:49PM (#44698723)

    But alas, we're seeing fewer tech hubs not more.

    You really think so? I grew up in the Bay Area, but still had family and regularly visited Colorado (where I now live).

    I remember as a kid that the only real "tech" here was the big IBM facility near Boulder (as I recall it was the printing division which turned into Lexmark, I could be wrong though). Then there was Celestial Seasonings... very Boulder... not very tech. I also recall Case Logic, which I guess was sort-of tech since they built stuff to hold disks and such, but that's a stretch.

    Now, heck, there's all kinds of tech here, and I think a huge factor in that is the quality/cost of life here is just so much better than The Bay.

    I know it's all anecdotal. Not everywhere is Denver/Boulder and that the conditions here are ripe for the "perfect storm" of start-ups (attractive to younger folks, lots of government money, geographically strategic). At the same time, though, the differences between The Bay 25 year ago and Denver 25 years ago are much greater than they are now, at least as far as "tech-start-upiness" goes. Also, it feels more organic here like it did in The Bay back then. You could even say that the intimidation factor of a well-funded Valley office would put off a lot of engineers, whereas the tendency for a more laid-back environment leads to less "rush rush rush" and more thoughtfulness.

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...