• Caro Visitante, por que não gastar alguns segundos e criar uma Conta no Fórum Valinor? Desta forma, além de não ver este aviso novamente, poderá participar de nossa comunidade, inserir suas opiniões e sugestões, fazendo parte deste que é um maiores Fóruns de Discussão do Brasil! Aproveite e cadastre-se já!

The Unbreakable Mark Zuckerberg

Esse artigo em inglês fala um pouco da fissura a ser coberta por alguém do setor de tecnologia americano por meio de alianças se a pessoa quiser ser eleita:


THE SILICON VALLEY MINDSET

The tech industry is one of the most powerful entities affecting our world. But who are these people? And what do they believe and how do they think about the world? A couple of recent articles provide a window into this.

Rationalist Demographics
Clique para ampliar...

The first is a set of demographics from the reader survey (unscientific, but with 5500 respondents) of the popular blog Slate Star Codex. SSC is the web site of Scott Alexander, pen name of a Midwest psychiatrist. It’s explicitly associated with the Rationalist movement and especially the Less Wrong community. If you’d like to get a feel for the Rationalist way of life, see the New York Times Magazine profile of them. One site says of them:

…typical rationalist philosophical positions include reductionism, materialism, moral non-realism, utilitarianism, anti-deathism and transhumanism. Rationalists across all three groups tend to have high opinions of the Sequences and Slate Star Codex and cite both in arguments; rationalist discourse norms were shaped by How To Actually Change Your Mind and 37 Ways Words Can Be Wrong, among others.



They analyze the world in terms of Bayesianism, game theory, trying to become aware of personal biases, etc. They are trying to improve themselves and the world through a clearer sense of reality as informed by their philosophical worldview above. Their heartland is Silicon Valley, though there’s a group of them NYC too of course.

Alexander is a psychiatrist, but this community, and the Rationalists generally, is highly tech centric. Alexander himself is a defender of Silicon Valley. His readership is predominantly in computer science and other related tech professions, and overlaps heavily with Silicon Valley.

His readers are 90% male, 89% white (Asians under-represented vs the Valley), and 81% atheist or agnostic. They skew significantly left in their politics. 55% of them are explicitly politically left, with another 24% libertarian. A higher percentage actually describe themselves as neoreactionary or alt-right (6.3%) than conservative (5.7%).

The following table shows their responses on various topics:

Item Left/Globalist Position Right/Populist Positions
Immigration 55.8% more permissive 20.3% more restrictive
Feminism 48.1% favorable 28.4% unfavorable
Donald Trump 82.3% unfavorable 6.6% favorable
Basic Income 60.1% favor 18.6% oppose
Global Warming 72.8% requires action 13.7% does not require action
Weightlifting 64.4% no/rarely 22.5% yes/often
Silicon Valley Founders Survey
A second source comes from a recent City Journal article by former Tech Crunch reporter Gregory Ferenstein. He used the Crunchbase database to survey 147 tech founders, including a few billionaires and other influentials, to get a sense of their belief system.

One of his core findings is that Silicon Valley founders are strong believers in income inequality.

The most common answer I received in Silicon Valley was this: over the (very) long run, an increasingly greater share of economic wealth will be generated by a smaller slice of very talented or original people. Everyone else will increasingly subsist on some combination of part-time entrepreneurial “gig work” and government aid. The way the Valley elite see it, everyone can try to be an entrepreneur; some small percentage will achieve wild success and create enough wealth that others can live comfortably. Many tech leaders appear optimistic that this type of economy will provide the vast majority of people with unprecedented prosperity and leisure, though no one quite knows when.



The founders he surveyed (a tiny subset so beware of error margins) 2/3 believed that the top 10% of people would collect 50% or more of all the income in a meritocracy (the system they endorse).

Y Combinator Paul Graham got in trouble for openly talking about inequality as inevitable. Not because other Valley execs thought he was wrong, but because the optics are bad. It’s similar to Uber CEO Travis Kalanick. His real crime was being so gauche as to put a picture of Ayn Rand as his Twitter avatar. He should have known that he was supposed to spout politically palatable bromides while running his company in a Rand-like mode, which seems to be how many of these firms in fact operate.

Speaking of which, the politics of Silicon Valley are an odd mix of leftism and hyper-market economics. Overwhelmingly, Silicon Valley donates money to the Democrats and to progressive causes. (They also largely hate Donald Trump with a passion). What’s more, they have a communitarian streak and don’t think of themselves as hard core individualists:

Indeed, in my survey, founders displayed a strong orientation toward collectivism. Fifty-nine percent believed in a health-care mandate, compared with just 21 percent of self-identified libertarians. They also believed that the government should coerce people into making wise personal decisions, such as whether to eat healthier foods. Sixty-two percent said that individual decisions had an impact on many other people, justifying government intervention.



But they also support a neoliberal vision of the economy.

Silicon Valley’s reputation as a haven for small-government activists isn’t entirely off base: the Valley does support some staunchly libertarian ideas, and the tech elite are not typical Democrats. They don’t like regulations or labor unions. For instance, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg have both given hundreds of millions of dollars to charter schools and supported policies that would allow public schools to fire teachers more readily and dodge union membership. Big tech lobbyists are also strong supporters of free trade. According to Maplight, several telecommunications companies have lobbied for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal that union groups and many Democrats oppose.

…

Theirs is a move to make public schools more like charters—a different focus from a libertarian vision of simply privatizing the education system. The tech elite want to bring the essence of free markets to all things public and private. Using traditional American political categories, this would land them in the Republican camp.



This is most evident in their techno-utopianism and belief that unbridled creative destruction always brings long run benefits:

On the capitalistic side, tech founders were extraordinarily optimistic about the nature of change, especially the kind of unpredictable “creative destruction” associated with free markets. Philosophically, most tech founders believe that “change over the long run is inherently positive.” Or, as Hillary Clinton supporter and billionaire Reid Hoffman told me: “I tend to believe that most Silicon Valley people are very much long-term optimists. . . . Could we have a bad 20 years? Absolutely. But if you’re working toward progress, your future will be better than your present.”



They in part reconcile all these through a belief in high taxation and redistribution, especially in the form of a basic income. This policy idea, nowhere fully implemented, is probably completely unknown to most Americans, yet has strong majority support in Silicon Valley (60% of SSC’s readers).

The Silicon Valley State of Mind
Combining these, what we see is that Silicon Valley is made up overwhelmingly of men, who are highly intelligent and with extreme faith in their intelligence and rationality, largely atheist, and largely leftist in their thinking, but who believe in an aristocracy of talent.

They exhibit extreme faith in the goodness of technical progress and seem to believe that human problems can be resolved almost entirely through the realm of technology and engineering. They believe in policy, but a technocratic vision of it in which their rationalist designs, powered by technology, inform government decisions.

One might say they are naive, but their track record of success gives them reasons for confidence. Consider Uber. Uber is effectively a technological workaround to dysfunctional politics and regulation. It has revolutionized transportation in many cities were taxis were before almost not available. Where almost all other reform efforts failed, Uber was a spectacular success. Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc. have all been extremely successful at what they do. And in any case, Silicon Valley’s “fail false” mentality means that they don’t necessarily see their failures – say, Mark Zuckerberg’s $100 million schools fiasco in Newark – as a reflection on their capabilities. Many failures and a handful of grand slams is how their system is designed to function.

What’s more, it’s not just them who thinks they can fix things. Much of the rest of society seems to believe it too. For example, Alon Levy just put up a post examining the composition of NY Gov. Cuomo’s “MTA Genius Grant” panel, and how it is heavily slanted towards tech people vs. transportation people. Of course, the politicians and transport people have failed with the MTA to date. So they lose credibility by failures as Silicon Valley gains it with successes.

However, their techno-optimistic view perhaps leads them to underestimate second and third order consequences and overestimate their ability to deal with them. For example, perhaps more than anyone else, Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey made Donald Trump’s presidency possible. Without his social media impact, and the ability of his troll army to drive news cycles, I very much doubt he would have gotten over the top. That’s a second order effect they never anticipated.

Also, Trump himself is a classic example of creative destruction. He disrupted the politics business in the same way Netflix disrupted the video rental one. Yet they despise him and don’t think this is a positive change. It seems that they only like disruption when they are the ones controlling it, and don’t really believe in creative destruction per se. Instead it’s just another term of art for their taking over one industry after another.

They themselves have no problem at all radically reordering society with unproven policies at levels far beyond what almost any political figure would do. Their blasé acceptance of massive job destruction and embrace of a speculative basic income scheme to compensate illustrate that. It’s no surprise to me that Mencius Moldbug, the founder of neoreaction (one of the sub-tribes commonly grouped with the alt-right that believes in absolute monarchy or the state as a publicly traded sovereign corporation), is a Silicon Valley techie and startup founder who reportedly started out in the Rationalist movement.

They are also comfortable with an almost feudal distribution of wealth, so long as it’s based on an aristocracy of talent rather than heredity. And it’s an aristocracy that believes it should rule as well as profit. When they talk about a communitarian ethos in which the government needs to compel people to act properly, it’s pretty clear who the determinant of that is. It will of course be intelligent “rationalists” like them, who know what is right, have the technology to bring it into being, and whose motivations are beyond question (at least in their own mind).

It’s a stunningly grandiose vision. Much like the EU, I suspect the public’s tolerance for it will be directly proportional to benefits continuously delivered. To the extent that Silicon Valley is able to deliver benefits to the common good, few will stand in their way. If the benefits slow, or the costs (including second and third order costs) start exceeding the benefits, we’ll see how it turns out for them.

Aaron M. Renn is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and an economic development columnist for Governing magazine. He focuses on ways to help America’s cities thrive in an ever more complex, competitive, globalized, and diverse twenty-first century. During Renn’s 15-year career in management and technology consulting, he was a partner at Accenture and held several technology strategy roles and directed multimillion-dollar global technology implementations. He has contributed to The Guardian, Forbes.com, and numerous other publications. Renn holds a B.S. from Indiana University, where he coauthored an early social-networking platform in 1991.

Photo by Maurizio Pesce via Flickr, using CC License.
Clique para ampliar...


http://www.newgeography.com/content/005639-the-silicon-valley-mindset

Basicamente, existe um vácuo entre os ricaços do vale do silício e o dia a dia da população americana demonstrado através do financiamento da mídia que apoiou a Hilary nas eleições passadas. Muitos deles são tão ricos que não precisam mais usar os próprios produtos e vez ou outra lançam ora coisas que as pessoas não pediram, ora produtos que são meio impraticáveis no dia a dia de quem não tem padrão de vida alto. Uma parte do grupo deseja tecnocracia tirânica, é vazia mesmo por dentro, mereceria sentar em cactos, São magnatas pedófilos financiando filmes para crianças, ateus financiando filmes para cristãos, bem a ética desse tipo tem um preço em dólares.

Do ponto de vista de popularidade aqui no Brasil ele poderia fazer uso do capital social dele tipo o Sílvio Santos na época que queria concorrer.

Como dito acima, tem uma estrada muito tortuosa para ele para vencer um dos maiores defeitos do setor de tecnologia americana atual que é super estimar a própria capacidade de oferecer soluções para problemas. O mundo real interpreta esse traço como arrogância que na guerra política e na natureza são fatais.

Não vou dizer que ele não seria capaz de mudar sua visão de mundo porque na verdade ele já mudou desde que a empresa dele foi criada. O discurso oficial do Facebook publicado em 2010 é diferente do discurso recente dado pelo Zuckerberg. Ele parece estar menos certo das coisas, menos cheio e si, com mais perguntas que certezas.

Pessoalmente desejo para esse povo do Silicon Valley o mesmo que desejava ao PT, quero distância. Pelo menos enquanto eles não voltarem atrás na ideia de que preferem investir em empresas já com bom capital de giro do que em empresas que estão começando. Pra mim isso seria um sinal de boa vontade para com as classes menos endinheiradas.

 
Mas não são eles os maiores filantropos e investidores-anjo da História e do planeta? :)
Obs: ouvi dizer que o Facebook vai investir em celulares com hologramas nas câmeras... Será verdade? Que acha disto? :)
 
É da propaganda deles que eu não compro. Vão dizer que são bons porque são chamados de investidores anjos e outras coisas que soam bem na mídia (também financiada por eles). Mas é como dizer que a primeira vítima de gripe espanhola foi a mais rápida e primeira no pódium e ganhou dos outros. Toda rapidez, vontade de inovar, etc... vai para o brejo se dão um pé na realidade e só dão ouvidos ao próprio umbigo. Vão ouvir os mesmos nichos viciados. De lá também pode sair um louco igual o Kim da Coréia.

Sobre hologramas eu preferiria que melhorassem a tecnologia dos celulares com projetores antes disso. Duração de baterias por exemplo, qualidade de som e potência das luzes. Esse tipo de coisas. Podem até alegar que no rastro de um programa para fazer holograma apareça a tecnologia mas energia tem que ser prioridade hoje em dia em minha opinião.
 
Antes é preciso se situar no setor de comunicação brasileiro. Nós passamos por pelo menos 3 mudanças importantes nos últimos 25 anos:

1-Abertura do mercado que começou estatal e virou livre concorrência (Telemar, Intelig, etc...)
2-Popularização de aparelhos celulares para todas as classes sociais
3-Com advento de celulares "smart" a criação e programas ou aplicativos para aparelhos

Estas mudanças estão previstas dentro da terceira revolução industrial sendo que o mundo começa a pensar na quarta revolução industrial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Industrial_Revolution

Países da ásia já dominam bem a terceira revolução tanto na formação de mão de obra quanto em mercado mas o Brasil ainda patina muito na infra estrutura básica. Nós dominamos bem as tecnologias da primeira e segunda revolução que são a indústria metal-mecânica, química de petróleo e derivados e eletricidade, mas a Terceira RI, dos eletrônicos ainda copia o que vem de fora e o que é usado aqui dentro sofre com nossa estrutura, por exemplo, hotéis não terem tomadas para usar aparelhos próprios, coisa que em países como EUA tem pra todo lado.

Por isso um dos setores que apresentaram resultado econômico positivo foram justamente as ciências agrárias e alimentos em que o país vem focando. No momento, competir em pé de igualdade com as novidades cibernéticas de fora ainda é muito caro aqui dentro (basta ver o peso de imposto em jogos de video game).

Ou seja, celular aqui dentro tende a acompanhar quem estiver enriquecendo nos setores que estiverem dando lucro no país.

First Industrial Revolution[edit]

Picture of the "Puffing Billy" steam engine taken in the Science Museum in London.
The First Industrial Revolution took place from the 18th to 19th centuries in Europe and America. It was a period when mostly agrarian, rural societies became industrial and urban.[4] The iron and textile industries, along with the development of the steam engine, played central roles in the Industrial Revolution.[4]

Second Industrial Revolution[edit]
The Second Industrial Revolution took place between 1870 and 1914, just before World War I.[5] It was a period of growth for pre-existing industries and expansion of new ones, such as steel, oil and electricity, and used electric power to create mass production. Major technological advances during this period included the telephone, light bulb, phonograph and the internal combustion engine.[6]

Third Industrial Revolution[edit]
The Third Industrial Revolution, or the Digital Revolution, refers to the advancement of technology from analog electronic and mechanical devices to the digital technology available today. The era started during the 1980s and is ongoing.[7] Advancements during the Third Industrial Revolution include the personal computer, the internet, and information and communications technology (ICT).

Fourth Industrial Revolution[edit]

1983 Industrial Robots KUKA IR160/60, 601/60
The Fourth Industrial Revolution builds on the Digital Revolution, representing new ways in which technology becomes embedded within societies and even the human body.[8]The Fourth Industrial Revolution is marked by emerging technology breakthroughs in a number of fields, including robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, quantum computing, biotechnology, The Internet of Things, 3D printing and autonomous vehicles.

In his book, The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Professor Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, describes how this fourth revolution is fundamentally different from the previous three, which were characterized mainly by advances in technology. These technologies have great potential to continue to connect billions more people to the web, drastically improve the efficiency of business and organizations and help regenerate the natural environment through better asset management.[9]

“Mastering the Fourth Industrial Revolution” was the theme of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2016 in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution holds unique opportunities to improve human communication and conflict resolution
Clique para ampliar...
 
Então, eu poderia te indicar ler relatórios de projeções dos próximos anos de grandes companhias estatais e privatizadas que dominam tecnologia da primeira e segunda RI no Brasil tipo a Petrobrás e Vale, mas depois dos abalos na nossa economia e com as tribulações internacionais muita coisa deles está furando. Tem investimento deles indo mais rápido do que era previsto e investimento que foi parado indefinidamente. Também o setor agropecuário está sofrendo para sobreviver. Aliás, esse tipo de serviço costuma custar dinheiro em consultorias.

Falando em termos locais, procure na sua cidade ou região se financeiramente você não está levando prejuízo em ficar nela. Na área de tecnologia a localização estratégica define "um mundaréu" de coisas (tipo serviços de internet de qualidade, etc...) como a distribuição do produto e acesso a canais de publicidade, venda, etc... Aqui no Brasil encontrar o lugar pode ser problemático.
 
Neoghoster Akira, qual a carreira que você segue ou deseja seguir? E se fosse para fundar uma empresa, uma startup, qual você faria, e em que setor? Seria no setor de T.I.? Tenho me impressionado com suas respostas... Você vai muito longe, meu rapaz. :) Talvez pudéssemos estabelecer parcerias produtivas, algum dia. :)
 
Amad... Sejong, qual o seu problema com o zuquerbergui?
Cara! que eu vi, esse é o quarto tópico que você abre falando dele!
Você tá trabalhando com marketing digital ou algo assim?
Se estiver, acho que tá indo pro lado errado, viu, porque não tá nada interessante
Tem que estudar mais e descobrir outras estratégias porque você tá só anóing as pessoa. :-x
 
É que o Zuckerberg é apenas a pessoa mais importante do século... Achei que seria interessante comentar sobre a revolução que ele está causando em nossa tecnologia, e que afetará nossas vidas, e as de nossos filhos. :)
 
Amadenaro Grandrago disse:
É que o Zuckerberg é apenas a pessoa mais importante do século... Achei que seria interessante comentar sobre a revolução que ele está causando em nossa tecnologia, e que afetará nossas vidas, e as de nossos filhos. :)
Clique para ampliar...
Isso significa que você não vai parar e eu vou ter que bloquear ao menos uns três tópicos por dia?
Ah, bem. Só pra saber.

tumblr_mg7uncAx6X1rrs3leo2_500.gif
 
Você precisa fazer entrar ou se registrar para responder

Tópicos similares

Béla van Tesma
Threads: uma nova rede social
Respostas
16
Visualizações
923
Fúria da cidade
Fúria da cidade
Mago Véio
O Senhor dos Anéis - A Caçada por Gollum
Respostas
15
Visualizações
662
the_kong
the_kong
Béla van Tesma
Metaverso é a nova obsessão das big techs no Vale do Silício: Estamos prontos?
2 3
Respostas
46
Visualizações
4K
Fúria da cidade
Fúria da cidade
Béla van Tesma
Retrospectiva 2021: confira fatos que marcaram a tecnologia no Brasil e no mundo
Respostas
0
Visualizações
706
Béla van Tesma
Béla van Tesma
Fúria da cidade
O 1º e-mail faz 50 anos! Por que ele ainda é fundamental na comunicação?
Respostas
0
Visualizações
409
Fúria da cidade
Fúria da cidade

Valinor 2023

Total arrecadado
R$2.734,79
Termina em:
Doar Ver
Back
Topo