Yes because everyone trusts what SalesForce is doing with their data..

(2) If you're WD, Seagate, etc. you may shift all your fabs to higher growth areas which means you create less supply for less demand products (spinning disks)

This is why I'm so bullish on Shopify. It increasingly is getting network effects (Shop.app) and people are starting to become even more brand loyal than before. Even Chinese companies are creating strong brand categories at a fraction of US counterparts and selling direct on Shopify to (e.g. Anker, Fnirsi, Fanttik, etc.)

FWIW - I agree with the premise of the article, but I have to say - the reason these types of practices are acceptable in American culture is exactly because of prominent "marketing gurus".

> Getting margin called and closed this way is not the same as going bankrupt.

Technically we don't actually know the details here since no one here is privy to the specific fund structure - which is very likely WAY more complex than reported.

So, realistically we're arguing semantics. I said it folded and for intents and purposes if you're getting margin called and have to sell, then that's folding.

Just like in poker I can fold and not play anymore and still have a stack of chips.

It's not part of the strategy or operating agreement of a GP/LP structure to sell a specific fund to another investment firm at a discount. The fund may buy and sell assets to create returns for LPs but selling the fund itself at a discount is not a successful exit, e.g. they folded.

And I want to get ahead of this absurd romanticism. I have plenty of counterpoints in all types of technical domains (3D printing, blockchain, you name it). Oracles don't exist, just stories of right place right time survivors.

> That's what he based the fund on.

His thesis was so true that his fund folded. Fancy that.

This exactly. As someone who once lived in Silicon Valley and then ended up interviewing 700+ CxO's of profitable (or nearly profitable) SaaS businesses in various domain specific fields, it amazes me how many prominent "experts" in SV believed they were consistently "right" simply because they made enough bets to eventually get one right. Maybe not in enterprise value terms, but in volume of companies there are FAR more successful and profitable SaaS businesses that you've never heard of because they were started by entrepreneurs in their respective domains (the MD who started an EHR platform or the truck driver who started a TMS solution, etc.).

The comparison is useful. Printers had decades to pivot and hence the anxiety didn't exist like it does today. Today's capital allocated wants this to happen within a decade.

1. It struggled to remain "solvent" because it lost taxable provinces relative to the costs of wars, administration, etc.

2. It took years for it to eventually "fall". It didn't just magically disappear overnight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21EYKqUsPfg

Right now, we keep creating new models with larger and larger weights and throwing hardware at it. His argument is that this is a dead end and ultimately we'll eventually go back to purpose fit algorithms like we've always done in the history of AI development.

They are not. Payment facilitators (like Stripe) are.

https://images.prismic.io/sacra/30d7bd58-8149-461e-a3c2-8a4a...

> would spend more time writing than I would have to spend reading

To your point however, the reason people don't like AI generated blogs is because there is a explicit recognition that the author of the blog lacked effort. There is a visceral response for the reader about the social contract "if you didn't spend as much time as I did why should I care about what's written here", it's however NOT that the quality is inherently poor (but perhaps one my insinuate that notion).

Source? Otherwise this is pure speculation.

What about Cisco?

Lol what? Facebook (pre Hack), Tumblr, Wordpress, Etsy...