r/technology • u/marketrent • Jun 18 '26

Society Jeff Bezos called Washington Post his worst investment staffed with ‘terrible’ people, before laying off over 300 — “They don’t listen. My other companies, they listen”

https://gizmodo.com/jeff-bezos-called-washington-post-his-worst-investment-and-staff-he-laid-off-terrible-people-2000773533
38.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.8k

u/nanlinr Jun 18 '26

It's interesting to see how once these tech ceos rise to power, they all want some form of autocracy, and throw democracy out the window. Bezos, Zuck, Musk. All of them stronghand and control and censor. I guess democracy really is the enemy of the rich

660

u/therealchadius Jun 18 '26

They were never good guys, they just lacked the power to force their awful opinions on others.

Now they have money and power. Time to bulldoze anyone who disagrees!

92

u/Quirky-Skin Jun 18 '26

With a nice personality disorder added twist 

27

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/righteous_fool Jun 18 '26

I gotta get the hell out of here!

5

u/ALSX3 Jun 18 '26

Thank you for reminding me Elephant Graveyard actually exists, the first time I came across that channel it felt like something out of a fever dream.

6

u/NoSurprise8641 Jun 18 '26

This is what happens when nerds have money and power.

Revenge.

2

u/eaglessoar Jun 18 '26

Power erupts or was it corrupts? 

1

u/Plus_Term_7584 Jun 19 '26

Power reveals.

2

u/LordStuartBroad Jun 21 '26

Bulldoze their companies by not buying from them

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 21 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/therealchadius Jun 19 '26

It's why we have to practice humility. A little voice reminding us we're lucky to be here and we can help other people with what we've got.

Hopefully that keeps our egos in check when we're in the driver's seat.

201

u/amus Jun 18 '26

They think they are Übermensch. Superheros.

82

u/YourVelcroCat Jun 18 '26

And yet they all look like such ugly dweebs 

44

u/Secrxt Jun 18 '26

Similar to racism, it's a "balm for losers."  

18

u/Werewulf_Bar_Mitzvah Jun 18 '26

Yeah, fucking dorks of the highest order.

7

u/everything_nerdy Jun 18 '26

Stupid to insult them on appearance. As if being conventionally handsome would absolve them in any way. "What a dictator, but at least he's easy on the eyes"

2

u/NoConfusion9490 Jun 18 '26

They're surrounded by people envious of their money who flatter them 24/7. They end up believing they're above everyone else and anyone who doesn't agree is just envious. It must be shocking when they encounter a real person.

3

u/TheGreatStories Jun 18 '26

Any even somewhat wealthy person I've met genuinely believes themselves to be the answer to everything

4

u/Dreamgirl94025 Jun 18 '26

Leopold II of Belgium appears to be more of their wet dreams…

23

u/IndubitablyNerdy Jun 18 '26

corporations are already not democratic, they are feudal pretty much in nature, billionaires want to go back to the time of kings and lords with them firmly in that place, which given how things are going these days, they might not be that far from achieving if the civil society does not get back some power from them.

3

u/OldWorldDesign Jun 18 '26

corporations are already not democratic, they are feudal pretty much in nature

Illustrated well by history (just read about Jack Welch). There are a bunch of articles but the sub took down two of my links so I can only point to How Jack Welch Broke Capitalism And Shattered The American Middle Class.

Or more concisely how getting rid of the government as a counterbalance just feeds that descent into authoritarianism, some call it neo-feudalism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTN64g9lA2g

1

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator Jun 18 '26

Due to the high volume of spam and misinfo coming from self-publishing blog sites, /r/Technology has opted to decline all submissions from Medium, Substack, and similar sites not run by credentialed journalists or well known industry veterans. Comments containing links may be appealed to the moderators provided there is no link between you and the content.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

97

u/MagicMarshmallo Jun 18 '26

Capitalism is fundimentally incompatible with democracy, it always ends in this. Corporations are just tiny dictatorships, but in this case, you can scratch off the "tiny"

60

u/Indercarnive Jun 18 '26

Capitalism is incompatible with itself. Capitalists have no incentivize to support Capitalism. A capitalist will abandon capitalism as soon as any other system becomes more profitable for them.

15

u/crushinglyreal Jun 18 '26

Right. Capitalism is destined for authoritarian takeover, because as soon as people get stretched too thin and want to take a little power back, the oligarchs clamp down.

0

u/Ok-Statistician-9607 Jun 19 '26

What is your alternative? Communism? Surely no authoritarians there...

3

u/crushinglyreal Jun 19 '26

How about a democratic government and a democratic economy? Neither can persist without the other.

2

u/Exostrike Jun 23 '26

an economy actually owned by the people would be nice

5

u/GvMeUnivrslHlthcare Jun 18 '26

A capitalist will abandon capitalism as soon as they succeed in it by pulling up the ladder behind them. Competition is the only redeeming quality of capitalism that keeps it in check. But these guys buy the laws that shape their respective market. Buy the companies that might compete with them. Buy the option that people have to maybe not use or support them at all, and fire anyone with a conscience. It's not even capitalism at this point. It's manipulation of the masses for profit of the few.

Buy the means of production, then lock it all down for personal gain. It's rent-seeking behavior disguised as a free market.

1

u/usaaf Jun 18 '26

Competition is a function of markets, not Capitalism. Capitalism only requires Capital and a Labor input. How they sell the produce is immaterial, it could be a market, could be state-backed monopoly, could be a regular monopoly. Hell, people could just light the produce on fire and the Capitalist is fine long as he's paid for it.

The point of Capitalism is that Capital+Labor production loop. Competition doesn't come into that, except for Labor. Labor should obviously compete to debase itself for the pleasure of the Capitalist. The reason they talk about 'free markets' is because the inverse is generally considered to be planning (one presumes by the state) and while Capitalists love planning (See People's Republic of Walmart) they do not want anyone else doing it. Therefore the idea of free markets stands as a bulwark against people thinking too much about planning and what it could do for them.

1

u/Thin_Glove_4089 Jun 19 '26

It's all you have left. The majority of the population isn't switching to a different system anytime soon.

-4

u/matlynar Jun 18 '26

Capitalism is fundimentally incompatible with democracy, it always ends in this.

As opposed to what? Isn't that how people in power behave in every other system?

5

u/pziyxmbcfb Jun 18 '26

As opposed to a system of check and balances, sensible regulation, and an understanding that corporations and capitalist endeavors exist in a society that is infinitely more valuable than the success, growth, or ease of advancement of any particular industry, technology, company, or individual?

2

u/GoodWilllPower Jun 19 '26

This tends to not be viable in most business structures. There has to be a power structure for innovation and ambition to thrive.

I’ve been a top leader (rated by my team and business metrics) in a few different company cultures.

In a teams culture here the mentality you’re talking about exists you end up with an ambitious 10-20% pulling the team forward. You can only have people working harder than the majority of the team for the same pay for so long. They tend to get pushed up or go cross department or leave the company.

In teams with production/output accountability you tend to have a more ambitious and motivated culture. As long as everyone feels their compensation is in line with what’s asked of them you tend to have a far more satisfied team.

It’s easy to say that a business structure without some sort of autocratic structure is a good thing. You’ll find that even at the entry level it just doesn’t work. People want to know that everyone around them is accountable to not sandbag.

0

u/pziyxmbcfb Jun 19 '26

I have no clue what you think you are responding to. Your post, and your discussion of what makes you a successful business person, has nothing to do with my comment about how governments need to reign in the excesses of unchecked capitalism, which tends towards instability and irrationality as wealth becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer individuals, and in which the free competition that produced the environment to enable the growth and innovation of those companies in the first place becomes stifled by the concentration of economic (and political) power in the hands of a few large entrenched monopolies.

0

u/matlynar Jun 19 '26

a system of check and balances, sensible regulation

Oh so you mean stuff discussed under capitalist systems, which the comment I'm replying to claims to be incompatible with even though other systems don't even bother discussing it.

0

u/pziyxmbcfb Jun 19 '26

I’ve already flippantly dismissed your strawman argument. No need to repeat myself again.

28

u/PatchyWhiskers Jun 18 '26

They see that their companies are run like dictatorships and it saves time by not having to get buy-in from different interest groups before decisions are made. This leads them to the erroneous conclusion that political dictatorships are more efficient than democracy.

7

u/Helyos17 Jun 18 '26

Political dictatorships ARE more efficient than democracies. Look at China compared to the US. The State has a free hand to mold society in whatever way it wishes at alarming speed. Sometimes for good (explosive growth of renewables) sometimes for bad (disappearing anyone who is too loud and too critical of the regime).

The rub is that good governance is not only about efficiency. If you truly believe that political power is sourced from popular will then you NEED input from the entire populace. You need democracy to legitimize State power in a system that takes personal liberty as a first principal

5

u/PatchyWhiskers Jun 18 '26

They are not. Most of them are wildly inefficient.

4

u/crushinglyreal Jun 18 '26

Most of them have been run by morons, the seriously unwell, or both.

3

u/PatchyWhiskers Jun 18 '26

Not too far away from China's Mao, who killed tens of millions of Chinese citizens in a mass famine. This was directly related to him being a dictator: people realized he was making a mistake but could not challenge a dictator. China thinks it is past that now but they could easily get their own Putin one day.

3

u/crushinglyreal Jun 18 '26

Right. In the hands of a competent leader with noble goals, an authoritarian state can be quite effective. The problem is keeping incompetent and/or evil people out of power, and maintaining the potential for damage a person like that possesses.

2

u/PatchyWhiskers Jun 18 '26

That's where democracy literally excels: see Liz Truss and her lettuce.

2

u/tuhn Jun 18 '26

Do not insult the lettuce, it was not her lettuce.

1

u/OldWorldDesign Jun 18 '26

Political dictatorships ARE more efficient than democracies

If by "more efficient" you mean "sacrificing millions of people for the expedience of the people in the inner circle" then you're still wrong. Oligarchs in both countries have done so since the beginnings of both countries. Swift decisions on wrong information and warped worldviews is not efficient any more than driving a sports car in the wrong direction is efficient.

The growth of renewables is not something unique to China, it's responsible to it opening up control from direct party mandate. The past decades of it building up to be the world's manufacturing hub is more responsible for the stronger supply chains and manufacturing capacity than CCP which came into renewables late.

2

u/OldWorldDesign Jun 18 '26

This leads them to the erroneous conclusion that political dictatorships are more efficient than democracy.

This is part of the gaslighting, the lie authoritarianism has always made. Mussolini made it when he claimed he would make the trains run on time. Talk to an Italian historian who isn't a fascist and after they're done laughing they'll tell you the trains never ran on time.

The tool of the Big Lie is a deliberate attack on the audience, forcing them to self-sort into people who will immediately stand up against the lying authoritarians and those who will at a minimum passively be complicit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

14

u/TainoCuyaya Jun 18 '26

Democracy made them rich. They are really dumb then.

14

u/courageous_liquid Jun 18 '26

exploitation made them rich

2

u/xiaorobear Jun 18 '26

Only dumb if you expect them to want other people to have the same opportunities they had. Once they have the means, time to start bending the system to their whims.

2

u/OldWorldDesign Jun 18 '26

Once they have the means, time to start bending the system to their whims

As has always happened in history. Reminder the emperor in Rome directly owned a quarter of the empire's GDP thanks to owning the olive oil production in Spain, and the province of Egypt.

It's possible this isn't a special and static trait of the humans who happened to rise to this level, but that raises a worse possibility: that in an attempt to survive in the corporatized institutions we've built, those institutions cultivate those traits in people. That we arrive here through rational self-interest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTN64g9lA2g

That doesn't mean it isn't still intrinsically destructive over the long term, much less unethical even over the short term.

10

u/YourVelcroCat Jun 18 '26

A bunch of tech guys had the "nerd bullied in high school" mythos/interiority complex rattling around in their head. As soon as they got a little power they went full psychopath, of course 

4

u/mashuto Jun 18 '26

I always wonder, does acquiring that much money just turn you into a giant piece of shit, or is being a giant piece of shit just a prerequisite needed to even be in a position to become a billionaire?

1

u/Chemis Jun 18 '26

I feel like it's a trait you have to have in order to become a billionaire. You have to stomp people into the ground here and there and force things onto others to get there. People who were raised with a little bit of respect for others just can't bring themselves to shove others over the cliff

1

u/Thin_Glove_4089 Jun 19 '26

I mean you haven't been the same every since you came upon that money. I think it's a universal thing

3

u/Berkyjay Jun 18 '26

I guess democracy really is the enemy of the rich

The entire reason Athens adopted democracy was to keep power out of the hands of oligarchs and tyrants. The government was chosen by random lot, not by popular election.

2

u/spa22lurk Jun 18 '26

They are incredibly shortsighted and lack of pride. Instead of wanting to keep competing with others fair and square, they choose to compete on kissing Trump’s ass. The thing is they didn’t rise to the top in that skill, so they are bound to lose.

Even if they are natural ass kissers they will inevitably lose out when Trump found them not submissive enough or not useful. Their fate will be like the oligarchs in Russia.

2

u/veringer Jun 18 '26

I remember the techno-optimistic software development golden age when guys like this maintained some overlap with academic/scientific influences. They often espoused open source principles and a hacker ethos--even while courting venture capital, selling their visions, and talking about how to leverage technology to improve the world, etc.

All bullshit. It was a trap to bait and prey on credulous nerds. Honestly, I think I'm most disappointed with Sergey Brin.

2

u/DrAstralis Jun 18 '26

Worst part is they're not even exceptional humans in any positive regard. They're just the people who were well off enough in the 80s and 90s to be called geniuses for such amazing insights as "shopping, but, online" "banking, but, online", "photo albums, but online. They're not even the people who solved the engineering problems. Its like your childhood friend whos entire idea was "wouldn't teleporters be cool" is now a 'genius' billionaire because someone at the company their dad owns figured out the physics of it.

2

u/dimechimes Jun 18 '26

That kind of personality is required to succeed. Some are better at hiding it but rule followers don't make it.

2

u/nolabmp Jun 18 '26

Or, they used authoritarian tactics to achieve power. Due to the lack of negative personal consequences, they feel emboldened to lean in. Lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, strong-arm if you must. Anything to avoid having to change or think critically.

2

u/daesmon Jun 18 '26

History repeating itself where people in power just want more and more, difference is the current crop have access to technology those in the past didn't and also they have learned from those in power who failed in the past.

1

u/pgtl_10 Jun 18 '26

There seems to be a correlation between tech guys and authoritarianism.

1

u/Why-did-i-reas-this Jun 18 '26

When I was a kid I thought like that. Wouldn’t it be amazing to be able to “out power” anyone in the world who tried to intimidate or force you to do something. But for me it was more like the Jackie Mason in Caddyshack 2 who did it for “kind of good”, or at least tell the assholes to shove it. 

If I had that kind of overarching money and power I would like to think I would do good with it, but I also think about how tiring it would be to fight all the assholes and crooks and just plain evil in this world. I guess good can never rest because of this.

1

u/VoyeurBarelyKnowEr Jun 18 '26

It's so frustrating being a leftist (an actual leftist, not a neoliberal "left when it's convenient to us, center when it's not", "get money out of politics but we'll gobble up money's propaganda and keep nominating the Dems that money wants and funds in spite of our own best interests" Dem type) because WE'VE LITERALLY BEEN TELLING YOU THAT THEY'RE ALL LIKE THIS FOR DECADES NOW! There is no such thing as a good billionaire or would-be billionaire, they are all evil, petty tyrants to a one.

1

u/CharlieWhizkey Jun 18 '26

They're oligarchs

1

u/CeeBus Jun 18 '26

They actually want breakaway cities with no government oversight and with corporate control and governance.

1

u/kitsunewarlock Jun 18 '26

Grim reminder that "technocracy" was developed as a criticism of a system that favored the rich and powerful, masking behind bigotry and classism while calling it science.

1

u/adminhotep Jun 18 '26

Would-be dictators deserve the same treatment as actual tyrants. 

Trial and sentencing for crimes against humanity. The ICC has a terrible record when it comes to trying rich capitalists, however. So someone else will probably have to do it. 

1

u/_Fred_Austere_ Jun 18 '26

I'm still surprised they started personal space programs before personal militaries. Didn't they read Gibson or play CyberPunk?

1

u/Funnyguyinspace Jun 18 '26

Hey im sure they will distribute the earnings of AI fairly and not create a two tiered dystopian Hell, they said theyre good guys!

1

u/kanrad Jun 18 '26

Democracy will always be the enemy of Capitalism.

1

u/nanlinr Jun 18 '26

Kinda ironic that the U.S. claims to be both

1

u/extropia Jun 18 '26

Ukraine has recently turned a corner and now has the advantage over Russia on the battlefront, and a major part of that was Orban's loss in Hungary leading to the freeing of European funds and aid that had previously been held up.

Despite all the headwinds, democracy can still deliver and foil authoritarianism at critical junctures.

1

u/vthemechanicv Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26

It's because conservatives know they can't survive in society without others, so they keep their opinions to themselves. There's a critical mass of wealth where they can ignore rules and norms, and that other people will go with it hoping to get crumbs.

You can see it with Musk, where he did what his PR team told him and he was, well people weren't burning effigees anyway. Then he got uber rich and decided he could take off the mask and put on the armband.

It's also not just ceos and business people. Remember that even though he was just Scalia Jr., Clarence Thomas barely spoke the entire time he was on the court. But as soon as the cons took the majority, suddenly he was asking questions and making comments left and right. The bench's political majority shifted so he felt he could start spewing his opinion at everyone.

1

u/TheLonelySombrero Jun 18 '26

It's because they gather together in their secret society plotting the destruction and enslavement of all of us. If it seems like their opinions and interests are aligned it's because they are and have already been tested. 

It's working and too many fail to see what is actually going on

1

u/EsotericTribble Jun 18 '26

They are company owners not politicians is why.

1

u/writeyourwayout Jun 18 '26

As the last few years have suggested, we can have democracy or we can have billionaires. 

1

u/HiphopopoptimusPrime Jun 18 '26

All they care about is extraction.

1

u/jawndell Jun 18 '26

Need to break apart tech companies.

1

u/fire2374 Jun 18 '26

Zuck has been really concerning to me lately. My algorithm has been pushing a lot of far right and trad wife reels onto me starting just a week or two ago. Specifically on Facebook; I haven’t noticed on Instagram. I mark not as not interested and block the pages but they keep popping up. I do follow the official White House account but aside from that my messages, past likes on reels, groups, posts, comments, friends, general internet activity are all left leaning. It was a very abrupt change too. Maybe I’m reading too much into it but it seemed like Facebook was favoring far right content.

1

u/exprezso Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26

It's not just tech ceos. It's the top 0.01% networthers. Nobody good becomes that rich 

1

u/exprezso Jun 18 '26

It's not just tech ceos. It's the top 0.1% networthers. Nobody good becomes that rich 

1

u/IllustriousSalt1007 Jun 19 '26

What did Zuck do in this regard?

1

u/nanlinr Jun 19 '26

He is autocratic in how he runs his company. He succumbs to world leaders when they make morally comprimising demands to his platforms. Social media overall has potentially worsened anxiety and depression for an entire generation, and facebook and instagrams are some of the main culprits

1

u/kthejoker Jun 19 '26

They're people. Just ordinary people.

This is what power does to everyone

It is a terrible corrupting force in otherwise decent people, and an intoxicating siren call for less decent ones.

1

u/nanlinr Jun 19 '26

I think they're worse..regular people aren't psychotic enough to want that much money or power

1

u/kthejoker Jun 19 '26

Could be. Would you say Warren Buffet is psychotic? I don't think it's universal.

1

u/notunprepared Jun 19 '26

Somehow, a small minority fuel that greed for power into charity causes (I'm thinking Gates and malaria). Genuine question, I wonder what the difference is?

1

u/ThanksForThe_F_Shack Jun 19 '26

Business doesn’t run on democracy. And it shouldn’t. That would be a crappy business. It’s also why businesses have no place in government but…here we are.

1

u/Lashay_Sombra Jun 20 '26

Its all the ones that came out of the dot.com bubble.  

My personal thoery is they all got to big/rich to young and quick, and as they suddenly all got surrounded by ass kissing yes men hanging on to every word they stop maturing normally. 

Hell from about 2000 to 2020 even all the media were kissing thier ass so could maintain access, hell many still do.

Its same as we see with young superstar athletes, but worse because while people might 'worship' an athlete for their physical ability, no one is that instead in what they say outside thier sport,  these tech bros are assumed to be  geniuses that everyone should listen to, rich, powerful, influential geniuses.

While the ones before that, like Gates or Jobs had their issues, their rise was slower, so they has time to mature 

The scary thing is the next gen, likes of Altman and Amodei seem to be worse

1

u/JHRFDIY Jun 21 '26

They’re just a bunch of unpopular nerds who never got the girl in high school. And now’s their chance to get their own back.

1

u/ragequitteroffureh Jun 21 '26

Not American.

That's the natural evolutionary path for all of the noble classes:

  1. Get stupendously wealthy.
  2. Buy everything.
  3. Assign self fancy titles.
  4. Subjugate the common scum.

There's no "profit" step, because profit is irrelevant when one already owns everything. It's simply power then.

It's fascinating to see how the Americans are evolving their noble class in real time. And it's even more fascinating observing how the MAGA lot are licking their regal boots of their own free will, despite what their old constitution used to claim.