Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Social Security cost-of-living adjustment could be 2.7% in 2026, according to new estimate [View all]jfz9580m
(15,958 posts)18. Andreessen is one of the very worst
He also comes off as a really stupid man. He was trolled by..I cant remember the details.. and I can no longer access New Yorkers one free article.
Anyway Nicholas Carr skewered him here (which is where I read about that):
https://www.roughtype.com/?p=9020
I like to think of Marc Andreessen as the metaverses Statue of Liberty. He stands just outside the virtual worlds golden door, illuminating the surrounding darkness with a holographic torch, welcoming the downtrodden to a new and better life.
You might remember the colorful interview Andreessen gave to trickster Niccolo Soldo last spring. At one point in the exchange, the high-browed venture capitalist sketches out his vision of the metaverse and makes a passionate case for its superiority to what he calls the quote-unquote real world. His words have taken on new weight now, in the wake of Mark Zuckerbergs announcement that Facebook is changing its name to Meta and embarking on the construction of an all-encompassing virtual world. Andreessen, an early Facebook investor and one of its directors since 2008, is a pal of Zuckerbergs and has long had the entrepreneurs ear. He is, its been said, something of an Obi-Wan to Zuckerbergs Luke Skywalker.
Andreessens vision is far darker and far more radical, eschatological even. He believes the metaverse is where the vast majority of humanity will end up, and should end up. If the metaverse Zuckerberg presents for public consumption seems like a tricked-out open-world videogame, Andreessens metaverse comes off as a cross between an amusement park and a concentration camp.
But I should let him explain it. When Soldo asks, Are we TOO connected these days?, Andreessen responds:
Your question is a great example of what I call Reality Privilege. A small percent of people live in a real-world environment that is rich, even overflowing, with glorious substance, beautiful settings, plentiful stimulation, and many fascinating people to talk to, and to work with, and to date. These are also *all* of the people who get to ask probing questions like yours. Everyone else, the vast majority of humanity, lacks Reality Privilege their online world is, or will be, immeasurably richer and more fulfilling than most of the physical and social environment around them in the quote-unquote real world.
The Reality Privileged, of course, call this conclusion dystopian, and demand that we prioritize improvements in reality over improvements in virtuality. To which I say: reality has had 5,000 years to get good, and is clearly still woefully lacking for most people; I dont think we should wait another 5,000 years to see if it eventually closes the gap. We should build and we are building online worlds that make life and work and love wonderful for everyone, no matter what level of reality deprivation they find themselves in.
Its tempting to dismiss all this as just more bad craziness from Big Techs fiercely adolescent mind. But that would be a mistake. For one thing, Andreessen is revealing his worldview and his ultimate goals here, and he has the influence and the resources to, if not create the future, at least push the future in the direction he prefers. As Tad Friend pointed out in Tomorrows Advance Man, a 2015 New Yorker profile of Andreessen, power in Silicon Valley accrues to those who can not just see the future but summon it. Thats a very small group, and Andreessen is in it. For another thing, Big Techs bad craziness has a tendency, as weve seen over the past twenty-odd years, to migrate into our everyday lives. We ignore it at our eventual peril.
You might remember the colorful interview Andreessen gave to trickster Niccolo Soldo last spring. At one point in the exchange, the high-browed venture capitalist sketches out his vision of the metaverse and makes a passionate case for its superiority to what he calls the quote-unquote real world. His words have taken on new weight now, in the wake of Mark Zuckerbergs announcement that Facebook is changing its name to Meta and embarking on the construction of an all-encompassing virtual world. Andreessen, an early Facebook investor and one of its directors since 2008, is a pal of Zuckerbergs and has long had the entrepreneurs ear. He is, its been said, something of an Obi-Wan to Zuckerbergs Luke Skywalker.
Andreessens vision is far darker and far more radical, eschatological even. He believes the metaverse is where the vast majority of humanity will end up, and should end up. If the metaverse Zuckerberg presents for public consumption seems like a tricked-out open-world videogame, Andreessens metaverse comes off as a cross between an amusement park and a concentration camp.
But I should let him explain it. When Soldo asks, Are we TOO connected these days?, Andreessen responds:
Your question is a great example of what I call Reality Privilege. A small percent of people live in a real-world environment that is rich, even overflowing, with glorious substance, beautiful settings, plentiful stimulation, and many fascinating people to talk to, and to work with, and to date. These are also *all* of the people who get to ask probing questions like yours. Everyone else, the vast majority of humanity, lacks Reality Privilege their online world is, or will be, immeasurably richer and more fulfilling than most of the physical and social environment around them in the quote-unquote real world.
The Reality Privileged, of course, call this conclusion dystopian, and demand that we prioritize improvements in reality over improvements in virtuality. To which I say: reality has had 5,000 years to get good, and is clearly still woefully lacking for most people; I dont think we should wait another 5,000 years to see if it eventually closes the gap. We should build and we are building online worlds that make life and work and love wonderful for everyone, no matter what level of reality deprivation they find themselves in.
Its tempting to dismiss all this as just more bad craziness from Big Techs fiercely adolescent mind. But that would be a mistake. For one thing, Andreessen is revealing his worldview and his ultimate goals here, and he has the influence and the resources to, if not create the future, at least push the future in the direction he prefers. As Tad Friend pointed out in Tomorrows Advance Man, a 2015 New Yorker profile of Andreessen, power in Silicon Valley accrues to those who can not just see the future but summon it. Thats a very small group, and Andreessen is in it. For another thing, Big Techs bad craziness has a tendency, as weve seen over the past twenty-odd years, to migrate into our everyday lives. We ignore it at our eventual peril.
(That sounds about right-some sort of loathesome open world game or a cross between a concentration camp and an amusement park. Current Affairs writer Stephen Prager had a piece about the type of mentality behind this:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/the-sick-world-of-prison-tycoon-games)
Anyway, the whole thing is worth a read as is the Tad Friend article if you can access it. Carr is one of the very rare tech critics coming out of that cottage industry of tech criticism whom I respect aside from Yasha Levine. Most others are basically Si Valley plants and shills:
https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine
(I still use my IPhone since on the whole Apple is less creepy than Google, but its not enthusiastically/delusionally. That sounds like a faux curmudgeonly ad. Its just that in the hostage situation that is the relationship with modern tech, Id rather Apple didnt do a Boom! with my dull data).
Levine who has pretty good instincts about bullshitters also skewered this creep Shahid Buttar (who is also a sexual harasser) when he was challenging Pelosi from the left. Levine is actual left. He probably would not fit DU rules so I dont link to him directly. But he is an honest person and not a Russian plant or something. He really does attack all sides:
https://artistrightswatch.com/tag/yasha-levine/
The only good thing I have heard about the EFF is that they represented DU in some lawsuit. That aside they are basically libertarians who focus on the less important tech criticisms and attack the state more than the private sector.
This professor David Golumbia had a good piece about that in Medium. About how tech critics like Joy Buohlewimini focus only on the problems with the state never the private sector and this was before Trump turned the state into a joke/authoritarian one. He said that its specifically democratic states that critics like those sneakily attack. Cant find it now but it was on Medium I think.
I like to boost these pieces because lousy tech criticism confuses the brain.
One day hopefully if we ever come to our senses as a species we will look back at the technocreeps and techno leeches/their enablers of this era and be shocked by the jokey front hiding such a dark interior.
That was actually the alt right strategy throughout. This fun and games vibe that confuses the head with this really dark underlying contract. Seriously..fuck those guys and their enablers. There is nothing funny or cute about any of it.
Nowadays, I exploit gallows humor because gallows humor is the privilege of the screwed over not of these nightmarish creeps. Cant stand a humorless life anyway..which is why I find the bleak, brainless faux humor of the alt right so dumb.
The left can..if not meme (never thought that shit was funny) exploit humor. Most comedians are liberal/left leaning..and the ones thats arent arent very funny. Hard to kick down and look cool and funny.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
22 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Social Security cost-of-living adjustment could be 2.7% in 2026, according to new estimate [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Aug 13
OP
"But since you proles need to diet, we're actually cutting it to .0007% Tough shit." - G.O.P.
BoRaGard
Aug 13
#1
Give this fat conehead billionaire (Andreessen) the excess $ he so "richly" deserves
wolfie001
Aug 13
#7
Trump's pick to oversee Social Security COLA says "need to sunset" program (E.J. Antoni) says it's a Ponzi scheme
progree
Aug 14
#19
Mine went up a couple of years ago to where I could not afford it and dental and vision..
LiberalArkie
Aug 13
#13
oh fucking WOW!!! So a person getting 1k per month will get a munificent $.887/day!
niyad
Aug 13
#17