But then tech became such a big force in the American economy that people who had early successes when it wasn’t were set up to fund and enable high growth tech companies. Not a bad thing in and of itself.
And then they attributed their good fortune to their innate ability and merit as opposed to good luck and timing, and they’re too rich for anyone to convince them otherwise. Being ultra rich just breaks the feedback loops that connect you to reality.
their wealth multiplied exponentially in a way that has nothing to do with ability, value to society, or even value to the companies they invest in and own. They become richer not because they’re talented or right or even know how to build businesses (which many of the one hit wonders don’t)
Yet he somehow married into a wealthier family. Maybe he's bitter because he's on the lower end of the 2000s tech billionaires. He doesn't have "buy an NFL team for fun" money.
Anecdotally extremely true and especially cognitively dissonant to watch my dad comment on this phenomenon from his experience in .com era—that after making money once people throw money at you assuming you just know how to make more—but not translating that to how he views other tech folks
Andreessen is one of those people IMO. Above average smart but in the way that all overachiever types are. He’s obsessed with IQ (all the RW tech dudes are) and I would bet serious money his is on par with like, … mine. And mine ain’t bad but not genius either
And they see intelligence as some singular thing. "[so and so] is one of the smartest guys I know", with an implied "therefore..." as though there aren't a million at least somewhat separable types of intelligence.
I've said this before but I think we should let our super rich either pay a wealth tax or choose to publicly do an impromptu trivia contest or physical challenges against non rich people!
They would gamble on themselves & lose a lot! I think I could kick Andreessen's ass at jeopardy.
Yeah. IQ measures something, but it's a little vague what it is. And most "smart" "high IQ" people are about one standard deviation above the norm, if you're approaching 3SD over the norm, you're probably too geeky to be in a leadership position. Andreeson's IQ is like 3-30 million other guys..
But because he’s convinced that his success and .. IMPORTANT… *compounding wealth* that has nothing to do with his decision making or efforts or intellect … are evidence of his rightness
As someone who comes from the 2nd gen decendents of the big manufacturing fortunes of Chicago, I can totally attest to this. They weren't geniuses, they were in the right place when all the money got made in new industries.
I am two years younger the he is and let me tell you in high school in the 80s there was literally nothing lamer than a computer geek. I mean the lowest rung. I am sure he spent hours in his bedroom plotting his revenge on society for not recognizing he was our superior and laughing at him.
My era computer geeks were so different from the Gates/Jobs/Woz crowd. Those guys were hippies and liked rock music and aspired to be counterculture. Andreesen wanted to be the Emperor from Star Wars
Talent/intellect is likely distributed in a bell-shaped curve. Wealth is distributed in a *desperately* skewed manner.
There's no way any of the billionaires can be *thousands* of times more talented and/or hardworking than the average person. The two just aren't linked.
We end up with idiotic historically illiterate manifestos that guys who are demographically similar to him and enjoy the same high speed rides to mile 20 of the marathon take seriously
Gov. Jared Polis's family had a very early e-greeting card company that they sold to Hallmark when he was a kid for $$$. Then in college, he made a ton during the 1st tech boom, when if you did the first e-anything, someone would give you $2 million for it. Now he thinks RFK Jr. has good ideas.
The guy I worked for in my first job made $2 million in cash in one day because Alan Meckler was walking through the 55 Broad building in NYC and knocking on doors and buying companies in cash. (It was 1999 and 55 had a T1 line which was unusual at the time.)
That's a rich analysis. My far less sophisticated one is that rich dudes are a bunch of entitled, hopelessly narcissistic, thin-skinned bullies who flip the fuck out when they discover, to steal a line from @pkrugman.bsky.social, that "money can't buy them love."
Thing is, people forget that the Netscape exit to AOL was actually really disappointing. The company was in free fall. It was nice in pure money terms, but way less than what it had been valued at earlier.
Or more accurately, he licensed the government-funded software he worked on as part of a team at NCSA and monetized it briefly! So many of these doofuses built off of public funds
Honestly, you'd figure the guy who started netscape would know why regulatory and anti-monopoly actions are important. Also, what was the 90's tech, "we need to take pet stores, banks online" and we need solutions to bridge selling pet food online and taking money securely.
Comments
They would gamble on themselves & lose a lot! I think I could kick Andreessen's ass at jeopardy.
Just because they got lucky, they assume that they’re not only smart, but also right about everything.
There's no way any of the billionaires can be *thousands* of times more talented and/or hardworking than the average person. The two just aren't linked.