Whether or not any of the companies you mentioned (or other vc companies) have made the world better is irrelevant to the question of "Why did Alex react as he did to Justin and Amy's articles?"
Alex provides enough information about his beliefs and about why he thinks those articles conflict with them that I, at least, trust he knows why he reacted the way he did.
What is the point of questioning his level of self-awareness anyway? How does it further the conversation? Really, I don't understand the point of maxklein's comment.
First, he takes issue with the phrase "vocal minority". OK, mISV people are either in the minority or the majority. Why does that matter either way?
Then he ignores the major premise of the article (which I find interesting), and instead psychologizes Alex from behind his computer. What's the point?
The main issue which Alex brings up is far more interesting. What should we value more, personal happiness or improving as many as lives as possible? What organizational structures are most suited to these different goals? Are these goals mutually exclusive, as Alex seems to assume they are?
> Alex provides enough information about his beliefs and about why he thinks those articles conflict with them that I, at least, trust he knows why he reacted the way he did.
Really? I've never met him, but I know plenty of other people who despite providing a lot of information about their beliefs aren't completely candid with themselves about why they're reacting the way they do.
That is a good point, but is it really worth it for a bunch of strangers to debate the issue based on a blog post? I don't understand what anyone has to gain by examining his personal psychological makeup.
On the personal level I know almost nothing about these people (I heard a Mixergy interview with Hoy which was great). My reaction is to the notion that a big company necessarily improves the world more than a small one.
Alex provides enough information about his beliefs and about why he thinks those articles conflict with them that I, at least, trust he knows why he reacted the way he did.
What is the point of questioning his level of self-awareness anyway? How does it further the conversation? Really, I don't understand the point of maxklein's comment.
First, he takes issue with the phrase "vocal minority". OK, mISV people are either in the minority or the majority. Why does that matter either way?
Then he ignores the major premise of the article (which I find interesting), and instead psychologizes Alex from behind his computer. What's the point?
The main issue which Alex brings up is far more interesting. What should we value more, personal happiness or improving as many as lives as possible? What organizational structures are most suited to these different goals? Are these goals mutually exclusive, as Alex seems to assume they are?