5 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2024
    1. By insisting the issue with Uber was largely cultural, Swisher ends up affirming the myth that Uber was not only an inevitable but ultimately good innovation, a few bad apples notwithstanding.

      Perhaps without the toxic capitalism portion Uber may have been a great innovation? Maybe it would have been better as a co-op, community, or government supported organization which put the value into both drivers' and riders' pockets?

      Naturally the crazy hype which generated the VC money would have been needed to be replaced, so the question becomes: who would have funded the start up?

  2. Jun 2022
  3. Oct 2020
    1. We’ve certainly dabbled in the debate of “what is a tech company” but what we never addressed was why do companies do mental gymnastics to call themselves a tech company. It’s because venture as an asset class traditionally invested in technology because that is what presented the growth and return characteristics that matched their risk profile. So you try to call a desk rental or mattress seller a tech company.
    1. The lessons of Twitter and Facebook, other Internet-scale basic service layers that most of us use, are instructive here. After the honeymoon period is over, and disruptive returns need to be generated to pay off limited partners or satisfy public shareholders, the tensions that these monetization efforts create ultimately seem to separate the motivations of management from those of users and the broader ecosystem. How will Rap Genius–and Marc Andreessen–navigate these questions?

      This is probably the question of the past two decades which many companies are only beginning to realize.

  4. May 2020
    1. Third-party delivery platforms, as they’ve been built, just seem like the wrong model, but instead of testing, failing, and evolving, they’ve been subsidized into market dominance.