[billyraejohnson]

No, not really. A bad comparison. A programmer building software, commercially or not, will have a positive impact on something (product, customer, technology, ideas). Any negative impact coming from an enthusiastic programmer, in form of bugs causing outages or general errors in programme output will be unintentional. We rightfully call those programmers who intentionally cause damage in order to generate economic gains for themselves or their clients, a small group of people, cyber-criminals. We prosecute them, put them into jails, as is right. After serving enough time and provided they genuinely repent, we might let them integrate back into the society, like we did let Kevin Mitnick. Now people like WB who similarly use their competencies to intentionally cause economic damage to the society, in order to gain "value" for themselves and their clients, a small group of people, what should we call them and how should we treat them? What do you think?

[mo_42]

You're judging them based on what you think is a morally acceptable outcome.

I was talking about inner motivations of people to explain their behavior.

[billyraejohnson]

How could you possibly know what his inner motivations may be? Do you live with him or have at least talked to him for an hour? Yes I was talking about them based on the visible outcomes of their actions, that is what experience tought me about life and people in general. It's not the talk - it's the walk. Another real-life lesson: what we feel as being morally wrong or right, usually passes the test in the end, at least on major topics (equality, dignity, human rights, economy). Something being just legal, does not make it right. South Africa had a legalised discrimination against the blacks and in the nazi-era Germany it would have been against the law to hide a jewish kid from the deportations. Probably some weird nerd back then around 1937. discussed how we could not get involved based on just moral feelings. All this aside, how could anyone admire or worship these weird characters: WB eats at McD everyday, Bezos apparently dislikes music (!), Altman apparently had a prepper bunker since 2016, not to mention the boy-genius who blew away 44B on twitter. But yes, billionaires dont really have any liquidity, the money is all 'tied up'. They practically live hand-to-mouth.

[captainbland]

Software is riddled with harmful by design features, dark patterns, invasive surveillance, etc.

[billyraejohnson]

You are missing the point and are confusing real-world applications with SEO-optimised websites and e-commerce apps. Besides if anything, dark patterns, tracking etc. are pushed mainly by the product mgmt. sect, a group which I agree has had a lot of toxic impact and is mentality-wise closer to the monkey-banana-hoarders than to their engineering peers.They share the same lack of competence, unfounded arrogance and tunnel vision with the likes of Uncle Warren. It all has nothing to do with the genuine, intrinsic motivation of an engineer.

[kjghkjghkjgh]

He's generated hundreds of billions for his investors, which include millions of small investors. In what exact way has he caused economic damage to society?

[billyraejohnson]

No, the workers have generated billions, not him. But he and his ilk damage the society by pressuring the company mgmt to perform layoffs and cut costs until shit hits the fan. Have you not heard of the struggles of workrs at one of "his" companies regarding the sick leave, have you not heard of the East Palestine, Ohio disaster (I know - not his company, but may have been as well), precision-scheduled railroading and how it completely messes up the lifes of the workforce affected. Did you sleep over the increasing push for RTO so the billionaire class could keep the value of "their" real-estate? The lives of people and environmental impact be damned! The letter of that investor to Google CEO, asking for even more layoffs, commending him for a well-done round one? Finally, have you been living under the rock and have not heard the steady talk of "incoming recession", well for more than 12 months now, the Fed's Powell openly calling for higher unemployment rates and lower salaries. That CNBC talking-head from a few months ago, saying effectively, people still had too much money in their savings accounts? One gets an impression they seem to really, really want to spark the next recession. Are you perhaps too young to remember the credit crunch of 2008? Hint - do a bit of research on Uncle Warrens wise investment decisions leading up to that crisis. Well yes now, one does wonder, how the hell did the likes of WB exactly cause economic damage to the society?

[chii]

The parent poster is making the incorrect assumption that wealth and investment is inherently bad for society.

[xnyan]

You’re saying “incorrect” like there’s universal agreement on the subject. One can (and many do) just as easily argue that the rate of return on capital investment always exceeds economic growth in the long run. Over time, the resulting income inequality destabilizes society and leads to outcomes undesirable to everyone, like getting your head cut off by an angry mob.

if you believe this, capital investment does not make society better overall absent controls which insure income inequality cannot grow unchecked.

I’m not saying this is inarguably the truth, but if millions of people read “Capital in the 21st Century” then it’s at very least not a fringe idea, and one cannot simply dismiss criticism of investment as it exists in our economy.