What Tech Calls Thinking: An Inquiry into the Intellectual Bedrock of Silicon Valley (FSG Originals x Logic)

Suddenly, you didn’t have to experience work life, family life, and adult life to grow disillusioned with it. You could be disillusioned even before you joined the machine.

The term “disruption” makes a monolith of the particulars of the everyday, a leviathan out of structures and organizations that are old, have grown up organically, and are therefore pretty scattered and decentralized.

Disruption is premised on creative amnesia, on a productive or at least profitable disregard for details.

Disruption plays to our impatience with structures and situations that seem to coast on habit and inertia, and it plays to the press’s excitement about underdogs, rebels, outsiders.

Disruption looks for the foreshocks within stability. At the same time, we probably shouldn’t discount that sense of stability altogether.

Schumpeter agreed with Marx on two important points: that the ever-increasing efficiency of capitalist exploitation inevitably decreases the rate of profit, and that decreased rate of profit leads to monopolies.

But you get the sense that the film doesn’t direct its anger toward the big, bad corporation behind it all—instead, it spends most of its time lampooning the consumers who allowed themselves to be brainwashed by it. The cultural critic and blogger Mark Fisher has called this the film’s “gestural anti-capitalism,” and it is characteristic of Silicon

And by degrading failure, anguish, and discomfort to mere stepping-stones, they erase the fact that for so many of us, these stones don’t lead anywhere.

Just as kvetching over political correctness often requires the invention of the restrictions and pieties which it sees itself as engaged in a titanic struggle against, so the disrupter portrays even the most staid cottage industry as a Death Star against which its plucky rebels have to do battle.