top | item 21072915

(no title)

human20190310 | 6 years ago

I really wish the author had sensed the limits of his argument, because I think the point he's trying to make is basically correct. He's just stretching it to the breaking point by invoking Amazon and the subprime crisis.

If he'd left the stretch goals out of it, it would have stood as a perfect foil to the avalanche of "meta-meta-meta analysis of everything except where the money's gonna come from" in the Stratechery article [0] also up on HN now.

[0] https://stratechery.com/2019/neither-and-new-lessons-from-ub...

discuss

order

flashman|6 years ago

There's a line in the Stratechery article that makes perfect sense in the context of WeWork: "Uber without an at-scale competitor is a much more valuable company."

It's the same point Stoller is trying to make: Financiers "find big markets and then dump capital into one player in such a market who can underprice until he becomes the dominant remaining actor."

legitster|6 years ago

I can't recommend the Stratechery piece enough (or Stratechery in general).

RodgerTheGreat|6 years ago

On the contrary, given the author's myopic and rosy perspective on surveillance capitalism as espoused in the article "Privacy Fundamentalism"[1] (and apparently amended in a follow-up which is paywalled), I find it hard to take anything on that blog seriously.

[1]https://stratechery.com/2019/privacy-fundamentalism/