NolanTech journalists on Mastodon: "Mastodon Inc only has 50,000 users, but with adequate venture capital funding it may stand a chance"
More tech journalism on Mastodon: "Mastodon is currently a free service, but soon it will bend to the iron will of Silicon Valley, which is that you either sell out to investors or become irrelevant like Wikipedia."
Still more tech journalism on Mastodon: "Mastodon cannot survive with such a silly name. It needs a more serious and business-friendly name, such as Google, Yahoo, or Hulu."
It's almost as if tech journalists do the bare minimum of research before moving on to the next topic. Or that the tech industry has become so focused on chasing giant piles of money that nobody can remember a time when true successes on the internet were achieved by hobbyists working on passion projects with no regard for how much money they might make
Ꮢ๐ϲoᴄo Ⅿoԁｅm Ᏼaｓіliｓk
Klint Finley@enkiv2 @sonya @nolan re: "tech & business are mostly unrelated." I don't even know how to respond to that. You think that technology isn't a major part of basically every business around today? Or that business considerations don't shape everything from hardware manufacture to user interface design?
There's a circumstantial alignment of concerns. But tech is about as related to business as cooking is: both can be vital to businesses on both a minor and industrial scale (and more people eat than use computers), & certain segments are more integrated than others.
But restaurant reviews don't focus on catering & cookbooks don't focus on fast food, because the focus is on the end user in the normal case.
@sonya @nolan @enkiv2 A few inter-related things play into that, I think. For one, the biz side does matter more in tech than in, say, film. Who you get funding from will shape your company more than who you get funding from will shape your film. For another, a surprisingly large number of people are interested in reading insider basebally articles on the tech industry.
@enkiv2 @nolan @sonya That's led to the growth of sites like TechCrunch, which are essentially trade pubs but have a crossover audience of mainstream readers. So there ends up being a context collapse. A lot of tech coverage is the tech equivalent of the business briefs section of something like Oil and Gas magazine, but on the web, a link is a link. There's no difference between a business brief in a trade pub and a long read from something like the New Yorker.
& it's strange, since tech is more like cooking (i.e., most people who code aren't professionals even if most code is written by pros, there's a long shallow climb in difficulty/exclusivity between amateur & professional, & the industry has many varied important organizations instead of a few very similar ones).
Seeing Wired cover Zuckerberg feels like seeing the CEO of McDonalds on the cover of a cookbook.
What makes it stranger is that in the 70s & 80s there *was* a trade/hobbyist division in tech mags, even though the industry was much more movie-like in the 70s (with micros being the indie scene but the real players being the seven dwarves, and with even playing with micros being a big investment)