[spaghettiToy]

The time of innovation is over, the time of cashing in and preservation has come?

I think of the automotive industry.

Big tech will start to diversify, start banks, buy appliance companies, buy suppliers/vertical integration.

I believe that happened to Auto in the 60s and 70s, about 20-30 years after the boom.

If we (irresponsibly) use that timeline, we should expect dark days for the next 20 years. Most innovation will be outside the US. Then comes the 1990s where tech companies will sober up, cut the free food, and become competitive again. By 2010s they will be innovating again.... 40 years from now.

Sorry for the doom prediction, I just saw a pattern.

[scottLobster]

On the contrary, I look forward to innovation that actually has to be profitable at the end. All these bright-colored-plastic startups without a real business model will die, and ageism will lessen as experience and the ability to make money takes precedence over "culture fit" and "vision". Maybe Silicon Valley can even consider working with... the GOVERNMENT!!! You know, those institutions that actually have the authority to directly solve the problems Silicon Valley tries to make money off of? There's already some signs of this, thankfully. But I still roll my eyes hard every time some SV engineer has a moral outrage/stages a walkout because they discover their company has a DoD contract. It's long past time for SV to be brought back down a couple of levels, maybe not so far as to force them all the way back into the real world, but tree-top-level might be a good idea.

[HereIGoAgain]

Well said actually... mostly.

[spaghettiToy]

> roll my eyes hard every time some SV engineer has a moral outrage/stages a walkout because they discover their company has a DoD

You have 0 input with how weapons of war will be used in the future. I can't say I disagree.

[scottLobster]

That and no one is forcing you to work on said weapons. If someone has a moral issue with working for DoD, I think that's a little naive but that's their right. Demanding the company you agreed to work for, as a subordinate, comply with your personal vision of morality when you're not even in a leadership position is just childish.

Corporations by design are almost never democracies, you are working as a laborer for a dictatorship/oligarchy that's licensed by the overarching government for meeting certain legal requirements. That's it. If you want to dictate corporate values then gain authority within the company or start your own, or leave and go work for someone you see as more aligned with your values. As a rank-and-file engineer you have as much say in corporate values as a plumber has in his clients' choice of religion.

Exception to this is if you're a founding member of a startup, or working for an extremely small company where your contributions carry a lot of weight. In which case congrats, you're on the ruling council of the oligarchy by default, and if the company ever grows to a certain size maybe some idealistic low-level engineer will get indignant about your values :)

[tdeck]

If rank and file employees don't have a say, then why do you care what they demand? It seems more like they actually do have a say and they're figuring that out, and that's what you're objecting to.

[8note]

Thats a model for how the things work, but it's just a model.

In reality, corporations need labourers to get work done, and so labourers have the end say on what actually happens.

There's no need to religiously follow an ideology that says you are powerless when you are very obviously not powerless when you disregard the ideology

[tomrod]

Nah, there is a ton of fantastic innovation going on, and more to come.

Consider that health insurers are now mandated to release their pricing.

Maybe the days of FAANG cool are sunseting, but the new availability of data sources (cubesats, etc.) gets the innovation synapses firing for this graybeard.

[runnerup]

There's a lot to criticize the last 10-20 years of silicon valley for, but I don't inherently see it as negative that there's a continued concentration of diverse high-value labor in an area which has a lot of capital to deploy. It's worked out great in the past whenever areas pulled in a lot of smart people to work together.

I do hope that we move the goalposts closer to "value-creation" rather than "capturing value" but I think the way to do this is to glorify stories of value-creation and apply high taxes to rentiering wherever we find it. Although there is some non-global local value in supporting domestic rentiering of global products/services and ensuring that the outsized/unfair international revenues are re-deployed to domestic initiatives to chase novel value creation.

[tomwheeler]

That type of diversification was common with lots of companies back then, not just the auto industry. For example, CBS (broadcast network) bought Fender (musical instrument manufacturer), Pepsico (soft drinks) bought North American Van Lines (moving company), Sears (retailer) bought Coldwell Banker (real estate franchise), and H&R Block (tax preparer) bought Compuserve (online network).

[FollowingTheDao]

Yes, this is a bad sign IMHO. Economists are like hitmen, they do the dirty work when you are desperate.

[tomrod]

Are you thinking about management consultants (hatchet folks) and/or accountants? Economists are nerds that identify margins for improvement/opportunity cost -- they tend to fill strategy / marketing needs for quantification.

[vsareto]

>Most innovation will be outside the US.

Nice, it's about time someone else had a go at it. Maybe they'll have visa programs and we can escape the rest of the US's problems