🤔I have friends that absolutely hate Venture Capital. Hate the very concept. They believe that VC ruins everything, and that the setup is evil, and prioritizes hyper growth above everything. Some of these friends will drive over to my house just to sit me down and yell at me in unhinged rants about how evil VC is, scaring my kids.
If I think of the most unhinged, hyperbolic, doom and gloom rants about VC that I've ever heard? None of them paint VCs in worse light than Marc's manifesto.
I don't think that VC is necessarily bad. I think most of the problem is who gets to be a VC, and what they prioritize.
The National Science Foundation is effectively a VC firm. A crypto DAO is a co-op. NSF is decent. Crypto DAOs are fashy trash. For me, the issue is not "Co-op or VC."
@[email protected] Again, I question the assumption that "VC" is bad, because by assets under management, the vast majority of VC money is controlled by Alt-Right, openly anti-democratic, anti-social, hyper capitalist, fascist adjacent men. These dudes make horrific, near genocidal decisions in everything they do. The bad part of "nazi bank" is nazi, not bank. We need banks. So I won't know if VC is bad until Eg, Black women get more than *checks notes* half of 1% of all VC assets to manage.
This seems a very loose definition of VC. NSF takes no equity stake in the wealth produced. It demands no board seat. It requires the opposite transparency policy of the VC’s NDA.
The only thing the NSF has in common with VC is that it trades money for access. The rules around access, and the type of access, makes all the difference. One is oriented towards the common good, the other towards private enrichment.
Of course it's a loose comparison! Tongue in cheek.
In terms of equity, NSF is the US government. The US government gets direct tax revenue from the wealth generated, and indirect tax revenue from keeping the US ahead of other countries in terms of research. It boosts our industries. It also attracts many of the best and brightest scientists from around the world to the US.
That's a significant "return" for funding a few research projects.
@mekkaokereke I’m not sure that describing a government service, created for the common good after 150 years of public laissez-faire towards anything but war-related research, as a capitslist tool is productive. The framing is to the viewpoint of the capitalist side, and ignores the very real, fundamental differences in philosophy. And it’s pretty clear mych NSF funding would never happen thru VC.
You have a real comparison available: the CIA’s venture funding arm: In-Q-Tel.
mekka okereke 
jack the nonabrasive