Little Tech is our term for tech startups, as contrasted to Big Tech incumbents.
Little Tech has run independent of politics for our entire careers. But, as the old Soviet joke goes, “You may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you.”
We believe bad government policies are now the #1 threat to Little Tech.
We believe American technology supremacy, and the critical role that Little Tech startups play in ensuring that supremacy, is a first class political issue on par with any other.
The time has come to stand up for Little Tech.
Our political efforts as a firm are entirely focused on defending Little Tech.[1] We do not engage in political fights outside of issues directly relevant to Little Tech. But we will fight for Little Tech – for the freedom to research, to invent, to create jobs, to build the future – with all of our resources.
We find there are three kinds of politicians:
* Those who support Little Tech. We support them.
* Those who oppose Little Tech. We oppose them.
* Those who are somewhere in the middle – they want to be supportive, but they have concerns. We work with them in good faith.
We support or oppose politicians regardless of party and regardless of their positions on other issues.
America led the 20th Century because we are preeminent in three dimensions:
(1) Technology – America drove the Second Industrial Revolution through the 1930’s, and then the Computer Revolution since the 1940’s.
(2) Economy – America’s free market system created enormous societal wealth and dramatic improvements in quality of life for everyday people.
(3) Military – American military might drove victory in World War I and World War II, and then catalyzed the unilateral surrender and dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Each of these dimensions reinforces the other two:
* Our technology preeminence powers our economy and our military.
* Our economic growth pays for our massive investment in technology and in our military.
* And our military dominance keeps us safe from foreign threats and hostile ideologies that could crush our technology, our economy, and our people.
And, America’s success has positive global spillover effects to much of the rest of the world. American technology is the global standard. The American economy is the leading production and consumption partner of many other nations. And the American military has maintained overall global peace and prosperity since World War II to a level unprecedented in world history.
Naysayers say America’s best days are behind us, that the 21st Century will see America play a diminished role in all three dimensions.
We disagree.
There is no reason American technology, economic, and military leadership cannot continue for decades to come.
There is no reason the 21st Century cannot be a Second American Century.
Jul 5 • 5 tweets • 6 min read
THE LITTLE TECH AGENDA
Marc Andreessen & Ben Horowitz
July 5, 2024
Little Tech is our term for tech startups, as contrasted to Big Tech incumbents.
Little Tech has run independent of politics for our entire careers. But, as the old Soviet joke goes, “You may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you.”
We believe bad government policies are now the #1 threat to Little Tech.
We believe American technology supremacy, and the critical role that Little Tech startups play in ensuring that supremacy, is a first class political issue on par with any other.
The time has come to stand up for Little Tech.
Our political efforts as a firm are entirely focused on defending Little Tech.[1] We do not engage in political fights outside of issues directly relevant to Little Tech. But we will fight for Little Tech – for the freedom to research, to invent, to create jobs, to build the future – with all of our resources.
We find there are three kinds of politicians:
* Those who support Little Tech. We support them.
* Those who oppose Little Tech. We oppose them.
* Those who are somewhere in the middle – they want to be supportive, but they have concerns. We work with them in good faith.
We support or oppose politicians regardless of party and regardless of their positions on other issues.
America led the 20th Century because we are preeminent in three dimensions:
(1) Technology – America drove the Second Industrial Revolution through the 1930’s, and then the Computer Revolution since the 1940’s.
(2) Economy – America’s free market system created enormous societal wealth and dramatic improvements in quality of life for everyday people.
(3) Military – American military might drove victory in World War I and World War II, and then catalyzed the unilateral surrender and dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Each of these dimensions reinforces the other two:
* Our technology preeminence powers our economy and our military.
* Our economic growth pays for our massive investment in technology and in our military.
* And our military dominance keeps us safe from foreign threats and hostile ideologies that could crush our technology, our economy, and our people.
And, America’s success has positive global spillover effects to much of the rest of the world. American technology is the global standard. The American economy is the leading production and consumption partner of many other nations. And the American military has maintained overall global peace and prosperity since World War II to a level unprecedented in world history.
Naysayers say America’s best days are behind us, that the 21st Century will see America play a diminished role in all three dimensions.
We disagree.
There is no reason American technology, economic, and military leadership cannot continue for decades to come.
There is no reason the 21st Century cannot be a Second American Century.
Oct 16, 2023 • 15 tweets • 20 min read
THE TECHNO-OPTIMIST MANIFESTO part 1
“You live in a deranged age — more deranged than usual, because despite great scientific and technological advances, man has not the faintest idea of who he is or what he is doing.”
— Walker Percy
“Our species is 300,000 years old. For the first 290,000 years, we were foragers, subsisting in a way that’s still observable among the Bushmen of the Kalahari and the Sentinelese of the Andaman Islands. Even after Homo Sapiens embraced agriculture, progress was painfully slow. A person born in Sumer in 4,000BC would find the resources, work, and technology available in England at the time of the Norman Conquest or in the Aztec Empire at the time of Columbus quite familiar. Then, beginning in the 18th Century, many people’s standard of living skyrocketed. What brought about this dramatic improvement, and why?”
— Marian Tupy
“There’s a way to do it better. Find it.”
— Thomas Edison
Lies
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 angry, bitter, and resentful about technology.
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.
THE TECHNO-OPTIMIST MANIFESTO part 2
Truth
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.
We have the tools, the systems, the ideas.
We have the will.
It is time, once again, to raise the technology flag.
The era of Artificial Intelligence is here, and boy are people freaking out.
Fortunately, I am here to bring the good news: AI will not destroy the world, and in fact may save it.
🧵 twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
First, a short description of what AI is: The application of mathematics and software code to teach computers how to understand, synthesize, and generate knowledge in ways similar to how people do it. AI is a computer program like any other – it runs, takes input, processes, and… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Dec 19, 2022 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
Sandbagger.
Sandbagger!
Dec 11, 2022 • 9 tweets • 1 min read
"Alas! There comes the time when man will no longer give birth to any star. Alas! There comes the time of the most despicable man, who can no longer despise himself. Lo! I show you the Last Man."
"'What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?' -- so asks the Last Man, and blinks."
Dec 6, 2022 • 36 tweets • 4 min read
Whitepill #1: The hysterics have only a negative vision to sell. Narrow, pinched, sanctimonious, endlessly critical, resentful, bitter, demoralizing, depressing. No normal person actually wants to live like that.
Whitepill #2: Notwithstanding all the censorship pressure campaigns, information really is more readily available today than ever before.
New Twitter Terms of Service: gutenberg.org/files/10741/10…
"The feelings of honor and shame exist in every man who is not utterly depraved."
Nov 21, 2022 • 8 tweets • 1 min read
Many lands Zarathustra saw and many peoples; thus he discovered many peoples’ good and evil. No greater marketplace on earth did Zarathustra find than good and evil.
No people could live that did not first esteem; but if they want to preserve themselves, then they must not esteem as their neighbor esteems.
Nov 3, 2022 • 14 tweets • 1 min read
There are at least two sets of journalists continuing to contact my friends and acquaintances, trying to find out what I am up to.
I tried to help them write their stories with my prior tweetstorm (
), but I now realize I was insufficiently helpful. I only said what I was doing, not what I *wasn't* doing.
Oct 4, 2022 • 34 tweets • 5 min read
An Internet news outlet is asking a lot of people I know, and some I don't, what I've been up to lately. Lord knows what they'll ultimately publish, so I thought I'd just write this instead. -->
We are in my 14th year of working to build our venture firm, Andreessen Horowitz. The overwhelming credit for A16Z's accomplishments goes to Ben and all our partners, but I do what I can to contribute.
"The Professional-Managerial Class cannot be considered a stratum of a broader class of workers, because it exists in an objectively antagonistic relationship to another class of wage earners simply called the working class."
"We define the Professional-Managerial Class as consisting of salaried mental workers who do not own the means of production." [But nevertheless control them through their managerial roles, per Burnham.]
May 1, 2022 • 8 tweets • 1 min read
"The term professional–managerial class (PMC) refers to a social class within capitalism that, by controlling production processes through occupying a superior management position, is neither proletarian nor bourgeois."
"This group of professionals is distinguished from other social classes by their training and education, typically business qualifications and university degrees, with occupations thought to offer influence on society that would otherwise be available only to capital owners."
Apr 28, 2022 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
"Social fascism was a theory that was supported by the Communist International (Comintern) and affiliated communist parties in the early 1930s that held that social democracy was a variant of fascism because it stood in the way of communism."
"At the time, leaders of the Comintern such as Joseph Stalin argued that capitalist society had entered the period in which a communist revolution was imminent, but this could be prevented by social democrats and other 'fascist' forces."
Apr 27, 2022 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
"No right was deemed by the fathers of the Government more sacred than the right of speech. It was in their eyes, as in the eyes of all thoughtful men, the great moral renovator of society and government."
"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power."
Apr 27, 2022 • 11 tweets • 2 min read
Excellent question! Professor Nyhan has forgotten more about these topics than I will ever know, but I will do my best as an amateur and citizen to respond.
First, it is certainly true, as the Professor indicates, that the First Amendment and associated case law binds the government ("Congress shall make no law...") and not companies or individuals. But, the topic does not end there.
Apr 27, 2022 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
"In the United States, some categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Constitution protects free speech while allowing limitations on certain categories of speech."
"Categories of speech that may be restricted include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising."
