Jeff Berman’s Post

With Joe Biden now backing Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate for the next U.S. presidential election, the race is ON to win over the mighty American tech industry, centered in Silicon Valley, California. Before becoming Vice President, Kamala Harris served as Governor of California (2017-2021) and Attorney General of California (2011-2017). California is an overwhelmingly Democratic stronghold. “In San Francisco, only 9 per cent of people voted for Trump in 2016, rising to 13 per cent in 2020.” “Around 80 per cent of donations from internet companies have gone to Democrats so far in this election cycle, according to Open Secrets (though that has dropped from 90 per cent in 2020).” Last weekend’s assassination attempt on Trump brought new supporters to light. Elon Musk publicly declared his support within 30 minutes of the shooting. In a significant interview last week, Marc Zuckerberg emphasized the neutrality of the social media platforms he controls but acknowledged that Trump's immediate reaction to the shooting (raising his fist) was "badass," a clear compliment. The nomination of J.D. Vance on the Trump ticket is another clear signal from the Republicans aiming to garner more support from the tech industry. Vance was once the protégé of Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir and a member of the so-called “PayPal Mafia” with Elon Musk. Vance is a former venture capitalist, invested a significant portion of Thiel’s money. Peter Thiel, now the kingmaker within the Republican Party, is a prominent Libertarian. Libertarians advocate: -       On the economic front: minimal state intervention, freedom to entrepreneurs -       On the social front: freedom of the citizen in their private lives. Because of this second point, Thiel had a contentious relationship with Trump during his first term (2016-2020) due to Trump’s social policies. By nominating JD Vance, Trump has made a significant move towards aligning with Thiel, towards aligning with the venture capital industry, and with the tech entrepreneurs. Trump has also signaled a tough stance against Big Tech (specifically Google and Microsoft, which he associates with “wokism”) and Trump expressed reluctance to regulate #AI.

In recent weeks, many Democrats in Silicon Valley had kept uncharacteristically quiet as prominent technology leaders — including Elon Musk and the investors Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz — endorsed Donald J. Trump for president. Even though Democrats had long been a dominant force in Silicon Valley, some were unenthusiastic about supporting President Biden, who was unpopular in the tech industry. They wanted to see if Mr. Biden could change the narrative around his struggling campaign. And those who were vocal in their support — such as the tech investor Reid Hoffman — faced attacks. Tech executives and investors felt energized by the change. “It’s democracy time, people,” Roy Bahat of Bloomberg Beta posted on LinkedIn. Aaron Levie, CEO of Box, praised Biden’s “amazing leadership” on X, urging, “Now let’s go!” This enthusiasm contrasted sharply with recent dismay in tech circles over influential voices supporting Trump. The renewed energy could diminish pro-Trump momentum in Silicon Valley and attract more wealthy tech executives to back the Democratic ticket. Just last week, Silicon Valley seemed to lean right. On Tuesday, Andreessen and Horowitz of Andreessen Horowitz argued on a podcast that Trump was the best candidate for start-ups and planned to donate millions to his campaign. Days earlier, Musk had also endorsed Trump. They followed David Sacks and Chamath Palihapitiya, who hosted a $12 million fundraiser for Trump in June. Doug Leone and Shaun Maguire of Sequoia Capital also expressed support for Trump. These endorsements stemmed from several factors: Biden’s lack of close ties with the tech industry compared to previous Democrats, frustration with FTC appointee Lina Khan’s lawsuits against tech companies, and concerns over Biden’s plans to regulate AI and alter the tax structure, potentially impacting their businesses. But that reluctance to speak up changed when Mr. Biden announced on Sunday that he would drop out of the presidential race, paving the way for a new Democratic ticket. Across the tech industry, the floodgates immediately reopened. “People are fired up,” said Nihal Mehta, an investor at Eniac Ventures, a New York venture capital firm, pointing to an outpouring of excitement online and in group chats around the industry.

It's an interesting concept to consider Silicon Valley taking on a more prominent role in shaping American power and influence. The tech industry has certainly been a driving force behind innovation and economic growth. However, it's important to remember that democratic governance and accountability are essential components of a healthy society. While Silicon Valley can offer valuable insights and solutions, it should not replace the role of elected officials and democratic institutions in setting the course for the country. Balancing the strengths of both sectors could lead to a more balanced and effective approach to addressing global challenges.

Tech Titans and Political Tides: The Shifting Landscape of Silicon Valley In recent months, the tech industry has found itself at the center of political and social debates, with high-profile figures taking stands on contentious issues. From Elon Musk's criticism of California policies to the emergence of AI-driven disinformation threats, Silicon Valley is navigating a complex web of challenges that could reshape its future and impact global politics. Elon Musk, the enigmatic entrepreneur behind Tesla and SpaceX, has recently voiced his frustration with California's political climate, particularly regarding a new law on transgender children in public schools. This dissatisfaction has led Musk to publicly endorse former President Trump and hint at relocating his companies to Texas. While the extent of this potential move remains unclear, it underscores the growing tension between tech innovators and state regulations. Simultaneously, the rise of generative AI and deepfakes has sparked concerns about the integrity of information in the digital age. Get Real, a startup incubated by Ballistic Ventures and UC Berkeley, is developing a platform to detect and mitigate AI-generated disinformation threats. With a team of 30 employees, the company aims to have its technology operational before the upcoming election, emphasizing the critical need for fact-checking and addressing echo chambers to fortify democratic processes. The political landscape within Silicon Valley itself is becoming increasingly polarized. Tech luminaries such as Elon Musk, Marc Andreessen, and Ben Horowitz have thrown their support behind Trump and his potential VP pick, J.D. Vance. Their backing is largely attributed to Trump's tech policies, which promise to promote smaller tech companies through initiatives like open-sourcing AI and reforming antitrust regulations. However, the tech world remains divided, with figures like Steve Ballmer and Marissa Mayer maintaining their support for Democratic candidates. As we approach the next election cycle, the interplay between technology, politics, and social issues is becoming increasingly complex. The actions and allegiances of Silicon Valley's influential figures will likely have far-reaching consequences, not just for the tech industry but for the broader political landscape. It's clear that the tech sector's role in shaping public discourse and policy is more significant than ever, making it crucial for both industry insiders and the general public to stay informed and engaged in these evolving dynamics. #TechPolitics #SiliconValley #AIEthics #DeepfakeThreat #ElectionTech #TechGiants #CaliforniaPolicies #TrumpTechSupport

A truly fascinating Atlantic profile of Peter Thiel, “the world’s best venture investor” (according to Alex Karp, his Palantir co-founder) and the "techiest of tech evangelists, the purest distillation of Silicon Valley’s reigning ethos." Barton Gellman gets way into it in this piece--I had no idea how much I did not know about Thiel. So much great stuff, including an update on Thiel's ongoing quest for immortality (including a cryonics team ready to take over when, if ever, he does die), which he says originated with The Lord of the Rings: '''There are all these ways where trying to live unnaturally long goes haywire' in Tolkien’s works. But you also have the elves. 'And then there are sort of all these questions, you know: How are the elves different from the humans in Tolkien? And they’re basically—I think the main difference is just, they’re humans that don’t die.'" There's the history of Thiel's disenchantment (to put it mildly) with electoral politics: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible." And this sort of creepy credo: “The fate of our world may depend on the effort of a single person who builds or propagates the machinery of freedom.” Then there's the story of how Thiel rescued Musk's SpaceX in 2008, reflecting his "aspirations to promote space as an open frontier with 'limitless possibility for escape from world politics.'" (I love the fact that the author reached out on X to Musk to ask for an interview and "got a poop emoji in response.") The article features a great cast of characters--such as OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, "who revealed in 2016 that in the event of global catastrophe, he and Thiel planned to wait it out in Thiel’s New Zealand hideaway." And what story is complete without a mild flirtation with Putin. For Ian Fleming fans, there's the history of Thiel's stint as an FBI confidential source code-named........ “Philosopher.” Thiel reported back to the FBI on -among other things-what he thought was a Chinese plot to take over a big VC firm. He also believed that Jeffrey Epstein was Mossad.  So, if you were expecting any really GOOD news from this post, dream on. This next part is especially unfortunate -- illuminating though. It's Thiel's rationale (at least he's honest) for extreme greed: "Thiel feels that giving his billions away would be too much like admitting he had done something wrong to acquire them. The prevailing view in Europe, he said, and more and more in the United States, 'is that philanthropy is something an evil person does.' It raises a question, he said: 'What are you atoning for?' He also lacked sympathy for the impulse to spread resources from the privileged to those in need. When I mentioned the terrible poverty and inequality around the world, he said, 'I think there are enough people working on that.'"

J.D. Vance says Big Tech is too powerful The selection of J.D. Vance as Donald Trump's running mate is interesting. Despite his Silicon Valley background, Vance has taken a critical stance on Big Tech: 1. He's called for Google to be broken up. 2. He supports the Biden administration's efforts to constrain the tech industry. 3. Surprisingly, he's backed Lina Khan, the FTC chair many in tech view as adversarial. Yet Vance isn't anti-tech across the board: • He's pro-crypto and working on legislation to change digital asset regulation. • He has close ties to Peter Thiel and other tech investors. This nuanced approach signals a potential shift in Republican tech policy. It's a blend of populist skepticism of Big Tech's power with support for emerging technologies like crypto. For those of us in tech, it's a reminder that the political landscape is evolving. Both parties may push for more tech regulation, albeit in different ways.  Is Vance's approach a threat to innovation or a necessary correction? How should the tech industry respond? #TechPolicy #BigTech #Regulation #PoliticsAndTech https://lnkd.in/en__DehJ

American innovation is under attack. Radical antitrust sentiment, embodied by neo-Brandeisians, is targeting tech giants. It ignores their role in driving innovation and global competitiveness. To preserve our economic strength, we must reject this misguided "big is bad" philosophy. #economics #innovation #business

In today's fast-paced economy, a troubling trend emerges: 1. Disconnect between investors and genuine value creation is stark. 2. Revenue growth often prioritized over product quality and customer satisfaction. 3. Recent layoffs and mismanagement in tech and media highlight consequences. Might sound provocative but maybe we pivot towards a future where we place equal weight on customer satisfaction, product quality and revenue. Long term, healthy, growth.

Just Read: ‘Tell us what you really think’ would be an Australian’s ironic assessment of Kara Swisher’s download on the tech industry. ‘Burn Book’ is a combination of 30 years journalistic immersion - from the Wall Street Journal to Recode’s red chairs - covering the rise of Silicon Valley and an author who appears to have one speed - full throttle - and a core philosophy - call a spade a spade (at times a bloody shovel). Her early faith in the belief that everything that could be digitised would be digitised - along with that early techno-optimism many had at the time her career kicked off - paid off as she left Washington DC to immerse in the Valley. In so doing, rising to become, along with her professional partner Walt Mossberg, a pivotal commentator not just on the rise of big tech but in disassembling the mindset of those leading the charge. And it is that latter dynamic - alongside part memoir - that takes center stage in ‘Burn Book’. It is a brutally frank and highly entertaining assessment of prominent tech entrepreneurs, their motivation, personality and idiosyncrasies. She starts with December 2016 and her ire at the invitation to tech industry leaders to meet with President-elect Trump and at which, she argues, ‘they gave up their dignity for nothing’. What unfolds over the next 290-odd pages is Swisher’s assessment of how, in her opinion, tech companies ‘became key players in killing our comity and stymieing our politics, our government, our social fabric, and most of all, our minds, by seeding isolation, outrage, and addictive behaviour’. Could it be any clearer? The reflections don’t get much lighter and in various shades … whether for Netscape’s Andreesen, Amazon’s Bezos, Uber’s Kalanick, Microsoft’s Gates, News Corp’s Murdoch or Tesla’s Musk (‘…the most disappointing man…(in tech)’. A particular focus for Swisher is the industry’s emphasis on growth over consumer safety, including privacy, for which Facebook’s Zuckerberg is the lightning rod (‘…one of the most carelessly dangerous men in the history of technology who didn’t even know it.’). Others are reflected on more warmly, albeit some with various faults acknowledged, including Apple’s Jobs (‘the most consequential figure of the modern tech age’), Yahoo’s Semel, Shark Tank’s Cuban, AOL’s Case and Alphabet’s Pichai. But ‘Burn Book’ is far more than just about personalities. It is also about critical underlying issues in tech, including levels of accountability on issues such as privacy protections, antitrust behaviour, addiction and mental impact. One gets the sense - or perhaps it is just a wish - that a sequel is inevitable - and that #artificialintelligence will be at its heart. #technology #siliconvalley #bookreview #recode #techtitans #digital #journalism Kara Swisher #techindustry #techlove

Nobody elected Big Tech executives to govern anything, let alone the entire digital world. If democracy means anything, it means that leaders on both sides of the aisle must take responsibility for protecting the freedom of the American people from the ever-changing whims of these powerful companies and their unaccountable C.E.O.s. Today we’re stepping up to that challenge with a bipartisan bill to treat Big Tech the way we treat other industries.