Paradise Is a Police State: Examining the Techno-Optimism of Billionaire Silicon Valley Investor (And Unofficial Trump Administration Adviser) Marc Andreessen

Amid all the chaos of the early days of the Trump administration a small piece of news popped up. Venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), which is a partner to just about all of our tech overlords, is hiring Daniel Penny as an investor.

Penny is the former Marine who was tried last year and found not guilty of criminally negligent homicide in the death of homeless man Jordan Neely with a long history of personal tragedy and mental illness. After Neely made threats to passengers on a New York City subway, Penny held him in a choke hold, which killed him.

Without relitigating the case, the hiring is on its face a strange choice for the a16z; Penny does not have a background in investing.

But when viewed in the context of our new AI government that will make nearly everyone’s lives worse and our tech overlords’ eagerness to dispose of anyone they deem useless to their grand experiment, it begins to make more sense. Penny will work in a16z’s American Dynamism practice, which invests in government and defense tech.

A16z and its petulant billionaire cofounder and general partner Marc Andreessen is one of the plutocrats plunging us all into the Elon Musk-led grand experiment — one that is dismantling public institutions and turning their role over to automation intended to organize society for maximum profit. While Musk and his DOGE goons play point, others like Andreesen are assisting on policy, specifically on tech, business, economics, and the “success of the country” more generally.

“Success of the country.” To them, that of course does not mean stuff like reducing inequality, free high quality education and healthcare for all, and improvement of infrastructure. So what are they talking about?

Andreessen’s 2023 screed, “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” helps provide a glimpse of these tech billionaires’ egotistical worldview and where their grand experiment is going. If one can stomach the read, it can be thought of as a policy platform now being enacted.

What really stands out in Andreessen’s sermon is not just the incoherence and disregard for humanity, but that for all the tech billionaires’ fanciful talk of utopia and colonizing the galaxy, they harbor the same sense of victimhood that is a hallmark of the plutocrats so well described by Thomas Frank in “Pity the Billionaire”:

It has now been more than thirty years since the supply-side revolution conquered Washington, since laissez-faire became the dogma of the nation’s ruling class, shared by large numbers of Democrats as well as Republicans. We have lived through decades of deregulation, deunionization, privatization, and free-trade agreements; the neoliberal ideal has been projected into every corner of the nation’s life. Universities try to put themselves on a market-based footing these days; so do hospitals, electric utilities, churches, and museums; so does the Post Office, the CIA, and the U.S. Army. And now, after all this has been going on for decades, we have a people’s uprising demanding that we bow down before the altar of the free market. And this only a short while after the high priests of that very cosmology led the world into the greatest economic catastrophe in memory. “Amazing” is right. “Unlikely” would also be right. “Preposterous” would be even righter.

It’s getting a lot more preposterous. Let’s take a brief look at “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” here and then turn to how Andreessen’s incoherent snake oil plays out in reality. Here’s how it starts:

We are being lied to.

We are told that technology takes our jobs, reduces our wages, increases inequality, threatens our health, ruins the environment, degrades our society, corrupts our children, impairs our humanity, threatens our future, and is ever on the verge of ruining everything.

We are told to be pessimistic.

The myth of Prometheus – in various updated forms like Frankenstein, Oppenheimer, and Terminator – haunts our nightmares.

We are told to denounce our birthright – our intelligence, our control over nature, our ability to build a better world.

We are told to be miserable about the future.

Andreessen starts off by channeling John Galt from Ayn Rand’s 1957 Atlas Shrugged, a sort of Bible for free-marketers. Galt, an engineer whose genius is underappreciated, organizes a strike by the world’s industrial leaders, inventors, and businessmen, in order to bring about the collapse of the bureaucracy, rid the world of collectivization and free the individualist mind.

That’s much the same way Andreessen and his ilk describe their efforts today (apologies for the long quotes, but they really help capture the lunacy):

Our civilization was built on technology.

Our civilization is built on technology.

Technology is the glory of human ambition and achievement, the spearhead of progress, and the realization of our potential.

For hundreds of years, we properly glorified this – until recently.

I am here to bring the good news.

We can advance to a far superior way of living, and of being…

Techno-Optimists believe that societies, like sharks, grow or die.

We believe growth is progress – leading to vitality, expansion of life, increasing knowledge, higher well being…

We believe not growing is stagnation, which leads to zero-sum thinking, internal fighting, degradation, collapse, and ultimately death.

There are only three sources of growth: population growth, natural resource utilization, and technology.

Developed societies are depopulating all over the world, across cultures – the total human population may already be shrinking.

Natural resource utilization has sharp limits, both real and political.

And so the only perpetual source of growth is technology…

Productivity growth, powered by technology, is the main driver of economic growth, wage growth, and the creation of new industries and new jobs, as people and capital are continuously freed to do more important, valuable things than in the past…

We believe this is why our descendents will live in the stars.

We believe that there is no material problem – whether created by nature or by technology – that cannot be solved with more technology…

We have a problem of poverty, so we invent technology to create abundance.

Give us a real world problem, and we can invent technology that will solve it.

We believe free markets are the most effective way to organize a technological economy. …Profits are the incentive for producing supply that fulfills demand.

How will Andreessen and his friends eradicate poverty through profit-driven technology? Who knows? It certainly hasn’t happened yet, but that’s nothing a even more free market can’t solve:

We believe in market discipline. The market naturally disciplines – the seller either learns and changes when the buyer fails to show, or exits the market. When market discipline is absent, there is no limit to how crazy things can get. The motto of every monopoly and cartel, every centralized institution not subject to market discipline: “We don’t care, because we don’t have to.” Markets prevent monopolies and cartels….

We believe the techno-capital machine of markets and innovation never ends, but instead spirals continuously upward. …This upward spiral has been running for hundreds of years, despite continuous howling from Communists and Luddites. Indeed, as of 2019, before the temporary COVID disruption, the result was the largest number of jobs at the highest wages and the highest levels of material living standards in the history of the planet.

So what on earth is this guy complaining about? Some hypothetical limits on his precious AI, of course.

We believe any deceleration of AI will cost lives. Deaths that were preventable by the AI that was prevented from existing is a form of murder…

We believe there is no inherent conflict between the techno-capital machine and the natural environment…

We believe we should place intelligence and energy in a positive feedback loop, and drive them both to infinity.

We believe we should use the feedback loop of intelligence and energy to make everything we want and need abundant.

We believe the measure of abundance is falling prices. Every time a price falls, the universe of people who buy it get a raise in buying power, which is the same as a raise in income. If a lot of goods and services drop in price, the result is an upward explosion of buying power, real income, and quality of life.

So unlimited AI + unlimited energy = unlimited stuff. Which leads to a few questions. What would they need laborers for anymore? They’re already doing the whole AI and energy ramp up, so why isn’t life getting better? Why are prices rising? How much time does Andreessen need? He doesn’t say.

Victim mentality is a curse in every domain of life, including in our relationship with technology – both unnecessary and self-defeating.

Tell me about it. Unlike Galt in Atlas Shrugged, however, Andreessen and company unfortunately aren’t going on strike. “We are conquerors,” he declares at one point. And he’s got the enemy list for who needs conquering.

We have enemies.

Our enemies are not bad people – but rather bad ideas.

Our present society has been subjected to a mass demoralization campaign for six decades – against technology and against life – under varying names like “existential risk”, “sustainability”, “ESG”, “Sustainable Development Goals”, “social responsibility”, “stakeholder capitalism”, “Precautionary Principle”, “trust and safety”, “tech ethics”, “risk management”, “de-growth”, “the limits of growth”.

This demoralization campaign is based on bad ideas of the past – zombie ideas, many derived from Communism, disastrous then and now – that have refused to die.

I’ll just leave this here:

While Andreessen’s drivel is comical, it’s also deadly serious — as we can see with what’s happening with the Musk coup. Here’s Brian Merchant writing at Blood in the Machine:

These notions—AI can replace workers, the government should function like a startup—are not meant to describe reality; they are meant to create a permission structure for those in power to obtain more of it. Here, AI will either allow Trump and Musk to install more loyalists, hollow out the administrative state, or degrade the quality of services once provided; all outcomes that favor Trumpism, and, I guess, Muskism. The startup mentality, meanwhile, seeks to give license to break laws, in the name of progress, of disruption, of building the future.

Same as it ever was: Way back in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, early factory owners deployed automation to deskill workers, to justify employing precarious and child laborers, and as a means of circumventing long-held laws—all to produce more products at lower quality, and to concentrate profits, and power, in fewer hands.

What could this look like? As Yves wrote last week:

This program is so deranged, particularly in combination with the other intended Trump economic shock of radically cutting or otherwise disrupting Federal funding of all sorts of activities that one has to wonder if Trump is trying to create a US version of the neoliberal shock Russia suffered in the 1990s, which allowed mere mortals to become obscenely rich by hoovering up distressed assets.

Just a reminder of what that meant for Russian workers:

And Russian life expectancy:

It was the US’ best and brightest that sucked hundreds of billions of dollars out of Russia in the 1990s. They wanted another go at it after Project Ukraine was supposed to collapse the Putin government in Moscow. That failed spectacularly, and it looks like they’re taking aim at the US instead.

The poorest in the US have already been experiencing a declining life expectancy for decades, numbers which have worsened in recent years. And the country should reasonably expect to see sharper drops there, as well as declines in higher income brackets.

Despite all Andreessen’s highfalutin twaddle about intelligence and energy to infinity, what it all boils down to is absolute power for him and his pals, which involves further enriching themselves while crushing workers and a police state to help the grand project run smoothly.

Let’s take a brief look at what’s coming on those two fronts.

Your Wages Are to Crash to “Near Zero” but Don’t Worry

As we saw above in Andreessen’s “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” this is central to the future the techno oligarchs’ are busy building right now.

If it doesn’t work out for us lowly laborers, well, tough luck. I’m sure they’ll say they tried, but something prevented them from completing their vision, and we’ve only got to sacrifice more. They, of course, will not be sacrificing but instead reaping constant rewards for their genius, which we’re told is needed now more than ever in order to win the great AI race:

As Malcolm Harris wrote in his epic history of the American citadel of capital and eugenics “Palo Alto”:

War Capitalism could put on a blindfold and run into a maze of horrific, absurd plans with confidence because it had class power echolocation for a guide: As long as the rich strengthened and the working class weakened, then things had to be going in the right direction. It didn’t matter that capitalists were investing in finance sugar highs, monopoly superprofits, and an international manufacturing race to the bottom rather than strong jobs and an expanded industrial base. The twenty-first century was going to be all about software anyway, baby. The robots will figure it out. Silicon Valley leaders sat on top of this world system like a cherry on a sundae, insulated from the melting foundation by a rich tower of cream.

And so it goes. This time it’s AI with the goal of crushing labor or eliminating much of it. This go-round all the military keynesianism will flow to the top. As Cedric Durand writes at New Left Review:

Whereas capital traditionally invests to lower costs or meet demand, technofeudal capital invests to bring different areas of social activity under its control, creating a dynamic of dependence which ensnares individuals, businesses and institutions alike. This is partly because the services offered by Big Tech are not commodities like any other. They are often critical infrastructures on which society depends.

AI is where the American ruling class thinks it can win WWIII — or at least mint some trillionaires in the process — and the vision that accompanies this war is being crafted by the likes of Andreessen. For them it’s a world of abundance and luxury; for the rest of us not so much. The train is barreling down the tracks with the likes of Andreessen assuring us that it’ll all work out and paradise is nigh.

And yet, for a man convinced of paradise, his venture capital firm sure spends a lot of time and money worrying about police.

Las Vegas as Vision for America

Andreessen writes the following in his manifesto:

Technology doesn’t care about your ethnicity, race, religion, national origin, gender, sexuality, political views, height, weight, hair or lack thereof.

But it does, Marc. As Kevin de Liban from Inequality.org points out:

AI and related technologies are used by governments, employers, landlords, banks, educators, and law enforcement to wrongly cut in-home caregiving services for disabled people; accuse unemployed workers of fraud; deny people housing, employment, or credit; take kids from loving parents and put them in foster care; intensify domestic violence and sexual abuse or harassment; label and mistreat middle- and high-school kids as likely dropouts or criminals; and falsely accuse Black and brown people of crimes.

We can take the city of Las Vegas as an example. With Andreessen Horowitz’s help, it is one of the foremost adopters of aggressive AI policing that is simultaneously a boondoggle and devastating to those caught in the hallucinatory AI web.

It’s fitting that Las Vegas — the site of the post-WWII fusion of capital, spooks, zionists, and organized crime, and long a surveillance testing ground — is now playing the same role for AI. Edward Ongweso Jr. writes:

Natasha Schüll, citing her landmark study of machine gambling in Las Vegas (“Addiction by Design”). On close examination, gamblers are less addicted to winning than to the “world-dissolving state of subjective suspension and affective calm” that machine play offers. The shape and feel of consoles and seats, the displays and interfaces, the acoustics of the floor, the lack of natural sunlight, these and much more are engineered to maximize “time on device” and thus the casino’s profits. To further that end, casinos engage in an impressive array of surveillance to track gamblers, construct personal profiles, kick out winners, and determine the breaking points of losers—intervening just before they leave so that time on device can be maximized.

Because of the extensive data collection involved in managing a casino (i.e. ensuring gamblers are losing as much as possible), casinos have also functioned as a testing grounds for other industries interested in surveillance. Schüll names “airports, financial trading floors, consumer shopping malls, insurance agencies, banks, and government programs like Homeland Security” as just some of the beneficiaries of Las Vegas’s technological innovation.

As the police state expands in Vegas and across the country, so too do other aspects of Sin City:

It may have been unleashed by the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision, but as I wrote in 2021 it was partly supercharged by the Covid-19 pandemic: speculative finance bullshit proliferated thanks to “fintech” that reduced barriers to losing money on stocks, crypto, and NFTs; more traditional finance bullshit in the form of SPACs; the aggressive lobbying by the gambling industry to set up online casinos, influencer gamblers targeting children, app-based sports gambling, and closer ties between sports leagues and gambling outfits.

…a culture as committed to preying upon and immiserating its most vulnerable citizens as ours turns out to be a culture where people will retreat into various escapes/addictions, such as gambling or substance abuse. The world that lies waiting for us will not come to pass because of gambling, though gambling is actively ruining the one we currently live in.

No, the world that is being born is coming to us courtesy of the tech plutocrats like Andreessen, Horowitz, Musk, Thiel, and company.

Andreessen Horowitz is using Sin City as a little pet project where it’s deploying and testing AI and other tools in the city’s criminal justice system, and it provides a glimpse of the future the tech overlords embrace: Sigmund Freud’s “death instinct” in overdrive. Americans reveling in hedonism, turning their money over in rigged games in increasingly desperate attempts to catch up, and an advanced Israeli-style police state that’s been growing ever since the US’ Silicon Valley-led offshoring brought about the country’s novel approach that crime is a problem of too many criminals rather than too few well-paying jobs. All in a water-starved furnace. While that might sound like hell on earth to some, there’s also profit there outside of the casinos if you know where to look:

A November report from TechCrunch details how Horowitz paid to help the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s (LVMPD) police foundation purchase Skydio (an a16z company) drones for the department, including drone docks on schools.

And the city is adopting plenty of other products from a16z portfolio companies, including Prepared that uses AI to help with 911 calls, surveillance cameras from Flock Safety, AI license plate readers from Flock Safety, secure communications from startup Kodex, and Earnin’, which helps employees access their pay before payday. The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, which includes Las Vegas, is also the first transit system in the U.S. to implement system-wide AI weapons scans.

In response to the TechCrunch report detailing Andreessen Horowitz’s tentacles in Las Vegas, the two venture capitalists had the city’s sheriff on their podcast where they all doubled down.

“We’re not going to stop” funding purchases, Horowitz said.

Next on the list is AI to go through the reams of information the police receive when they subpoena cell phone tower data and AI for bodycams.

As Edward Ongweso Jr. writes after a January visit to CES, the annual consumer electronics trade show in Las Vegas, the tech crowd is growing more unhinged and their disconnect from reality stands out even in Vegas:

…entrepreneurs and investors enter into a dance where half-baked ideas or narrow use cases are given new life (scale) with a sufficient infusion of capital; journalists are lied to, seduced, distracted, or otherwise deputized in an extravagant masturbatory ritual performed with ironic self-awareness. “Don’t you see that while A is obviously never happening, B would be a genuine improvement?” I’m assured by financiers and writers who’ve come to the conference every year seriously wondering where their promised robot servants and sentient assistants are!

What was actually being offered at CES? This year, it was what Jared Newman called “AI gaslighting” as firms previewed plans to trick consumers into thinking long-offered features were new innovations made possible by “AI.”

What dangers do these delusions about AI pose?

It threatens to narrow our institutional imagination to the dreams of monopolistic firms and flood the zone with propaganda to reinforce these nightmarish visions, rehabilitate reactionary ideologies that pine for the ancien régime, and serves to enrich some of the least among us: white South Africans who don’t seem to have gotten over the end of apartheid. The concern about the Subprime AI crisis, as Ed Zitron puts it, is that it will not only misallocate resources in a bubble that’ll burst and leave behind immiserated masses, dessicated public institutions, and an increasingly withered capacity for political action not aligned with Wall Street/Silicon Valley’s interests BUT that it’ll empower masters of the universe like Peter Thiel who seem interested in building the worst possible future for all but themselves.

An honest look at Palo Alto’s past (eugenics, environmental ruin, and surveillance) and present (“less a fascism of blood and soil than a nihilistic capitalism of the bottom line”as Quinn Slobodian puts it) suggests the world we’re racing towards will be dominated by bantustans, though I’m sure the Riverians won’t have much qualms about putting casinos inside of them. The sooner we free ourselves of delusions about Silicon Valley’s supposed right-wing turn, the sooner we can articulate the futures we do or don’t want (and the technologies involved in both) and speak a bit more bravely about the gap between the stakes and our willingness to act. Quickly approaching is the day when we will see the embrace of a genocidal telos (“exterminism”) that’ll seek to sacrifice the environment, genetically and socially engineer humanity, and liquidate the uncooperative elements. All of the ingredients are already there. Now we wait for the Great Work that will bring together the brigands laying waste to our world for one last orgy of violence. Will it be those that seek to purify capitalism of its democratic flaw and colored defects? Or those that promise us it will give birth to yet another stillborn god?

While reading through Andreessen’s “techno-optimism” ramblings, I kept thinking that this is the logical end of organizing a system around neoliberalism that abandons the unfortunate in the name of capital accumulation. A system where Jordan Neely — who when he was 14 his mother’s body is found in a suitcase along the Henry Hudson Parkway — wanders the streets for years. A system where his killer goes to work for craven lunatics like Andreessen who rise to the top based on their lack of concern for humanity or the future of the planet, and who would throw their own mother into a pit if it made him a buck. All while remaining “optimistic” about it all.

For us lowly non-billionaires it’s probably time to build or strengthen local mutual aid networks. Because it won’t get any better should the one other option we’re gifted with in the greatest democracy in the history of the world return to power:

It’s little weasels everywhere you look at the top.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

31 comments

  1. Daniil Adamov

    “We believe any deceleration of AI will cost lives. Deaths that were preventable by the AI that was prevented from existing is a form of murder”

    Hilariously, this is what many intellectual supporters of the October Revolution in Russia argued about communism, and what many of their descendants would swing around to argue about shock therapy capitalism. The means justify the end, because if this end is not achieved, many more people will die for lack of an objectively superior and scientifically validated socioeconomic system. Perhaps this sounds less ludicrous than applying the same argument to AI, but it is just as free of evidence for the efficacy of its proposed miracle mechanism.

    Reply
    1. DJG, Reality Czar

      Daniil Adamov: Nevertheless, Andreessen trots out “communism” as a mortal foe. It is ludicrous. And as you write, what he is proposing is “scientific free-market fundamentalism,” which will lead to the blissful future in which the State withers away.

      What is going to happen, though, is similar to the cellular phone: Thousands of useless apps, demanding information about the user (which is the purpose of apps and of Andressen’s AI). More selfies. Access to thousands of Jell-o recipes. A kind of totalitarianism wrapped in bacon cheeseburgers.

      Reply
      1. Daniil Adamov

        “Nevertheless, Andreessen trots out “communism” as a mortal foe. It is ludicrous.”

        Indeed. I’d say he should look in the mirror, but he wouldn’t notice a thing.

        “A kind of totalitarianism wrapped in bacon cheeseburgers.”

        I hope that’s as far as it goes… With people like that in a position of elevated influence and power, I’d expect them to bend more and more national resources – rerouted from other uses – towards AI acceleration, and the environment and society be damned (more than is already the case). After all, anything short of fastest possible AI development would be a betrayal of humanity’s future, and anyone who stands in the way is a traitor and a wrecker. /s

        Reply
    2. hemeantwell

      A broad brush take: after the Russian civil war many proponents of communism wanted to put an end to high mobilization and centralization war communism. Thus NEP.

      Stalinism was in large part War Communism 2. The prospect of a return of external war set up a powerful, though resistible, logic for an exterminist internal war against “class enemies,” which in its own way was a self-licking ice cream cone (Stalin’s paranoia had a basis in external reality he himself constructed). Stalin was incapable of resisting.

      Reply
      1. Daniil Adamov

        Kind of… IIRC, Stalin was one of those who insisted on carrying on with the NEP, even after the left of the party (including Trotsky) began attacking it. Part of the explicit purpose of the NEP was to turn peasants – many of whom still had and clinged to property, how ever meager – into modern proletarians and integrate them better into the national economy. Basically it was supposed to do the same thing that the market economy did in Western Europe in terms of breaking down the peasantry, only much quicker. This was perceived as necessary for the transition to socialism and eventually communism… and at the same time, peasant smallholders are a natural base for rebellion against any central government. Foreign threats were a part of this too; secret police archives were full of reports that locals here and there were just waiting for someone, anyone to attack and bring the whole thing crashing down. They would’ve gladly helped (and many did later anyway, of course). The NEP wasn’t doing its work of dissolving this threatening and unhelpful mass fast enough, so Stalin decided he would achieve the desired result quicker through command methods.

        But that was ultimately tactics. The Bolsheviks were very serious about communism as the end goal. The question was about the most efficient way to it, whether there should be capitalist detours at one point or another or not. China today looks similar to me, but their NEP started and continued in a much safer situation, both at home and abroad.

        Reply
  2. Balan Aroxdale

    Andreessen starts off by channeling John Galt from Ayn Rand’s 1957 Atlas Shrugged, a sort of Bible for free-marketers. Galt, an engineer whose genius is underappreciated, organizes a strike by the world’s industrial leaders, inventors, and businessmen, in order to bring about the collapse of the bureaucracy, rid the world of collectivization and free the individualist mind.

    Revealing his age. Rand was already viewed with much cynicism around tech circles by the post dot-com 2000s. Andreessen is an aging gen-xer who made his fortune in the halcyon days of the explosive growth environment of the very early web. A very different economic and technological environment to the one we have today.

    Bluntly, I doubt if Andreessen even writes code anymore, even in his spare time. While he may be a shrewd businessman, he has not apparently been involved in actual technology development over the last 20 years. His “techno-optimism” contrasts sharply with other engineers his age still involved in development, who increasingly bemoan the sorry state of the software and tech industry in general, from both economic and technical standpoints. Older consumers are likewise aware of what has been lost.

    His essays recall the soaring optimism of 1980s technology and science fiction writers, but in 2023 this is the kind of flatfooted thinking that allows competitors like DeepSeek to come up from behind and eat your lunch, much as Andreessen’s technology itself did to the established publishing industry over the last 30 years.

    Reply
    1. Santo de la Sera

      “Revealing his age. Rand was already viewed with much cynicism…”
      Also revealing his developmental atrophy. When I was growing up, in the 1980s, Rand was something you might read and enjoy when you were 14, but by the time you were 17 you hoped desperately that none of your friends remembered your brief infatuation.

      Reply
      1. KLG

        Couldn’t resist:

        “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”

        – John Rogers

        I didn’t get around to The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged until my early-20’s, probably because my otherwise very good 11th-grade English teacher loved them both. And James Michener (I did really like The Source as a teenager, though). I was immune to the Objectivist Philosopher by then. Thank goodness.

        Reply
  3. hazelbee

    I can’t stand Las Vegas and this post just gives me a few more reasons to despise it. I hadn’t joined the dots to think about the surveillance aspects.

    I’ve had to go for work – conferences – several times, staying in the big hotels on the strip. The only way to stay sane being to get outside several times a day into real daylight. that and I take foam ear plugs to preserve my sanity walking through the casino to get… anywhere.

    Too gaudy, flashy, artificial, contrived, noisy, with carefully manufactured dopamine rushes. All in the middle of a desert with RH < 10%. Just awful.

    Reply
    1. Stillfeelinthebern

      Exactly my experience. I hated going there for work. Everything was man made and BIG. The entertainment was okay. My brother-in-law also pointed out that you never see smiles. Ugh.

      Reply
      1. Wukchumni

        Was staying at a friend’s house in Vegas overnight, and there was a football game on the telly, and guess what, most of the TV commercials are for the very same lawyers who all hold to a higher standard on billboards all over sin city, peddling their wares.

        Reply
  4. DJG, Reality Czar

    Thanks, Conor. I think.

    Present at the creation. The following is just regurgitated hallucinations of Saint Milton Friedman and Saint Gary Becker, patrons of the Becker-Friedman Institute, the holy grail of the Calvinistic cargo cult that passes for deep thought in the U S of A. >

    Marc sez: “We believe in market discipline. The market naturally disciplines – the seller either learns and changes when the buyer fails to show, or exits the market. When market discipline is absent, there is no limit to how crazy things can get. The motto of every monopoly and cartel, every centralized institution not subject to market discipline: “We don’t care, because we don’t have to.” Markets prevent monopolies and cartels….”

    Market discipline? As we witness the mysterious rise and costly stagnation of Amazon, Uber, Lyft, Disney, and who knows how many others? Market discipline, or whatever the term is these days for forced bankruptcy, exists only for smaller businesses. The large ones merge and have buyouts. Conversely, investment banks come in and loot — and, somehow, market discipline doesn’t apply to their predatory practices, just as market discipline has never applied to Amazon and its predatory pricing and predatory practices.

    So we are seeing emergences: Andreessen as the theorist, purveyor of slop. Vance, the Catholic convert as the true believer and pretty face of the mess. Musk as predator and opportunist. Trump as avenging angel.

    The U.S. populace is between Scylla and Charybdis. Monstrous excrescences of capitalism. Vance is a boy gorgon, but that doesn’t make me nostalgic for addled-genocidal-sadist Biden or his avatar of studied incompetence, Kamala Harris. Nancy Pelosi is too busy stuffing the money bags to lead an opposition.

    What is to be done, groundlings?

    Reply
    1. Carolinian

      Indeed what is to be done. The supposed good guys gave up on socialism and into the vacuum stepped the Randians with their crackpot version of individualism. The roots of all this are not now and Silicon Valley but rather the 1980s and Reagan. And indeed Trump seems increasingly a throwback to that “bended knee” time when the Age of Aquarius learned to love rich people again. Time for a Dynasty reboot on TV?

      It seems there may be some polls coming out that suggest that the public at large are a lot less upset about all this than the Dems are. Some of us have always scoffed at the Trump/Hitler panic but the Dems sure to seem determined to be Weimar. We need different politics if the political assault that is the above concern is to be opposed.

      Reply
  5. GramSci

    So I asked my neighborhood AI “Does the burning of fossil fuels increase atmospheric carbon dioxide? ”

    «Yes. The increased emissions from fossil fuels are directly affecting atmospheric CO2, which is accumulating in the atmosphere and causing average global temperatures to rise through the greenhouse effect.»

    I’d love to ask Andreesen who’s wrong here? AI or Technology?

    Reply
  6. Wukchumni

    Pavlovegas is all about reinforcement, and security in casinos is so over the top compared to anywhere else, the perfect role model for our bright and shiny new police state, with detective AI on the beat.

    Reply
  7. Thuto

    Beyond a certain level of wealth, more money doesn’t result in more happiness (happiness asymptotes to a logarithmic scale), the hedonic treadmill takes of that. What keeps growing unconstrained in a certain class of people the more money they have is “God Complex”. This techno-utopian manifesto is dripping with it, so certain is Marc Andreesen of the infallibility of the logic underpinning his vision for humanity’s AI-enabled future that a religious analog would be the Pope delivering teachings “ex-cathedra”. His call for techno-feudalism to be unleashed under the guise of unshackling our potential as a species is testament to the terminal hubris which afflicts him and his ilk. Such hubris is a tough beast to tame, and with the tech bros take over now under way in Trump 2.0, these guys are gaining root-level access to the power apparatus aka the US government (and despite Deepseek puncturing the canonical AI investment thesis, it’s an accelerant for the tech bro takeover “because China…”), with the root and branch reform proposed by DOGE and others being used as cover to sequester power for these new age robber barons.

    Re: White South African billionaires pining after the days of apartheid. Trump and Musk have been taking aim at us this last week, peddling lies about “white genocide” and confiscation of land here in the southern tip of Africa (to say nothing of the irony of the timing of these attacks on us when they’re enabling a real, ongoing genocide and salivating at the prospect of “owning Gaza”).

    Reply
  8. ChrisFromGA

    Meh. AI is already stagnating. It’s mostly marketing dreck, and I see very few actual use cases that could bring the sort of change we had with the World Wide Web and Internet adoption in the 90’s.

    Andreesen sounds like another delusional tech bro with too much time on his hands. We should replace him with a very short shell script.

    Reply
    1. redleg

      The problem isn’t the AI, it’s power hungry billionaires. They have the power to force stuff upon people and governments whether it works as advertised or not, with the ultimate benefit of more money and power to themselves.

      Reply
  9. Mikel

    Andreesen:
    “There are only three sources of growth: population growth, natural resource utilization, and technology.”

    “Only.”
    Those three things have do with growth of profits.
    Sets a limit to what people are supposed to think of as a real civilization/society, but claims to be the one with expansive ideas.

    Reply
    1. Etrigan

      Well sure, this bulk pack of low-watt bulbs has replaced every conceivable conceptual iota of quantifying reality and the works of humankind with a religious-inflected monetary unit, most likely one they will eventually wall off access to from the hoi palloi. Our bodily inputs and outputs, efforts, connections, joy, pain and personhood increasingly subjected to ever outlandish extraction and rents. All so a dwindling number of elite crab barreled incompetechs can drown in their envisioned vat of bliss

      Reply
  10. The Rev Kev

    Thanks for this one, Connor. It will take a while to unpick it all. It has been said that Silicon valley has been going through every dystopian book and film from the past few decades – and has been trying to realize them so that they can profit from it. Who am I to disagree. But for many years I have been reading about what people like Andreessen are like. The sort who moan that they have to pay taxes but don’t wonder how the water & electricity that flows into their homes and the roads they drive on gets paid for. Scott McNealy is another one of these type who once famously said ‘You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it.’

    I will say one thing. He said in a tweet ‘A world in which human wages crash from AI — logically, necessarily — is a world in which productivity growth goes through the roof, and prices for goods and services crash to near zero. Consumer cornucopia. Everything you need and want for pennies.’ So I guess that he was absolutely thrilled when that Chinese DeepSeek came out and you could get ‘everything you need and want for pennies.’ Too bad about his own investments though.

    Reply
    1. LY

      I met a guy who wanted to make Neal Stephenson’s Diamond Age primer a real product, except with more AI, and no human actors. It reminds me of the aspiring types who used Michael Lewis’ Liar’s Poker as guide, except now its the works of Stephenson and William Gibson.

      Reply
  11. JustTheFacts

    Half of all humans on planet earth only exist because of fertilizer and the Haber-Bosch process. So Andreesen is right that we are now dependent on technology and energy usage, whether we like it or not. Most of us live better than princes 300 years ago could imagine and that is only because of technology and our ~800 “energy-slaves”.

    Unless we want to go back to the existence of a medieval peasant, and kill a lot of our population, we will need to find an alternative non-polluting energy source, such as fusion.

    At the moment his notions about AI seem far-fetched, but not uncommon. However the fact that uninformed people like him, who believe they’re in the know, have such ideas may lead to mass unemployment.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *