this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2025
125 points (90.8% liked)

News

24639 readers
4296 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

In 2017, tech leaders like Mark Zuckerberg and Sergey Brin supported progressive causes, yet over time many shifted toward pro-business, conservative stances.

Changing economic conditions, capital crunches, and reduced growth diminished the appeal of progressive policies, prompting tech firms to prioritize profit and market dominance.

Biden's aggressive regulatory actions, including antitrust cases and wealth tax proposals, further alienated Silicon Valley, significantly intensifying its shift toward conservative support.

Such realignment poses significant political challenges, forcing Democrats to urgently reconsider policies and strategies while balancing public interests against ever-growing corporate influence.

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 18 points 5 days ago

Money

That's all

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 5 days ago

"always has been"

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 5 days ago

They always were.

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Vox is utter shit. The fact that this isn't obvious to them or their bone headed readership is telling. The jist of the article seems to be, "That makes sense, I understand why they would do something like this. It is totally rational!"

Manufacturing consent.

[–] gi1242@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

I'm just happy more people are talking about it. but yes the article could certainly have been shorter

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Why can't all big tech be like valve?

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Because they Don want some money.

They want all the money forever.

The super rich have a mental illness

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Why can't all dictators be benevolent? Why can't all cops be paragons of virtue?

You can't create a system of incentives that drive people towards terrible behaviours and then expect them to behave well in spite of those incentives. That's living in a dream world.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So because of people being shitty one can't hope for people not being shitty?

I think a good example proves that people are capable of such a thing, and still be very well of, without added incentives.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago

That's not remotely what I'm saying.

People generally tend to behave in very pro-social ways, when they're allowed to. But capitalism creates a perverse set of incentives that penalize pro-social behaviours and incentivize anti-social behaviours. You can't have a system that's set up to allow only the worst behaviours to survive and expect good behaviours to come out of it.

[–] Opinionhaver 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The way towards centre from left is to the right.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 111 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That's a lot of words when 'greed' would have sufficed.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Sociopaths.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 29 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s not even greed… just pragmatism with no morals to keep the companies in check.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Exactly. Look at our "news" industry, built on supposedly the critical function of journalism. When $ is the output and $ becomes the input, it can easily be steered to antisocial ends. Medicine, higher education, they've all been distorted and corrupted by profit motive.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The issue with ascribing everything to personal greed is that it leads people to think the solution is to turn to companies with more benevolent executives, when the problem is really an institutional one that requires institutional changes.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Capitalism is systemized greed. It is exactly the right word.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I didn’t say it was wrong, I said it leads people to seek the wrong solution.

At least if you present it as a one-word summary, without an accompanying explanation that would be substantially longer than the thing you’re claiming to summarize.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Why do you think people are coming to Lemmy for solutions to the systemized greed we call capitalism?

[–] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 55 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They didn't "turn right" , they were always right-wing

1000045696

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 days ago

They just dropped the pretense.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago
[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Why do rich people support Republican politicians, more at 11. /s

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This article doesn't mention what I think is the key difference: Democrats' hostile regulatory environment against Crypto. I bet all of these Tech Bros bought Bitcoin and Ethereum early, and are sitting on a huge stash of it. Hell, we know Musk personally pumps Dogecoin every chance he gets. Some regulation is necessary in the space, but Biden's SEC was going way too far.

So, you have all these yoyos with extra money, and Citizens United which says it is speech. Is it any wonder they steered the money toward the guy who would let them do whatever the hell they want?

[–] hark@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Some regulation is necessary in the space, but Biden’s SEC was going way too far.

Could you please elaborate on this? In what ways did they go too far?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I'm curious about that as well.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The SEC wanted to consider every bit of crypto a security. But most securities are issued for the purpose of raising money. So, a company makes a formal offering of shares, or debt, and that is all regulated. The investors are essentially participating in whatever the company is doing.

Cryptocurrencies with Blockchains aren't like that, though. It's not a cooperative enterprise where everyone is making a profit. It's released on a set schedule according to the protocol. Anyone can join in the mining/staking process simply by having the right equipment (and in the case of staking, enough of the coin to qualify). Furthermore, you can buy and sell coins without participating in the underlying mining/staking mechanics. So it's not a common undertaking at all, it really resembles a currency or commodity.

The SEC went hard after US exchanges like Coinbase for selling "unregistered securities", while not really defuning it all that well, and without actually giving exchanges a process to register even if they wanted to.

Now, I will add that there exchanges also all sell shitty tokens like $TRUMP. Those are different, because they are governed by a smart contract riding on top of a Blockchain. They are a layer removed from the Blockchain they are riding on. There is no utility there; the utility is all in Ethereum or Solana or whatever Blockchain enabled the shitty token.

The SEC could have done everyone a lot of favors by simply saying "Blockchain coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum are commodities, Shitty ERC-20 tokens (or their non-ethereum equivalent on other chains) are securities and need to be registered before being traded in the US". If they provided a web form and charged $100 per shitty token, they might even make enough to fund all the crypto enforcement when those shitty tokens inevitably get pump-and-dumped. ($TRUMP will get dumped, too, eventually.)