Marc Andreessen made his first fortune writing the code that became Netscape, the Internet browser. He is now a venture capitalist who evangelizes about the growing importance of software in business today. Indeed, he proclaims that software is eating the world – that it will be the primary source of added value – and offers the following prediction: the world will one day be divided between people who tell computers what to do and people who are told by computers what to do.
Andreessen’s aim is to shock his listeners – not just for effect, but to get them to do something about it. To stop the world from being divided between a few alpha programmers and many drones, he wants the potential drones to stop taking easy liberal arts courses in college. Instead, he wants them to focus on courses in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), where the good jobs will be. But will this solve the problem that he poses?
Perhaps not.
Put differently, in a winner-take-all world, bringing up the average level of skills or education does nothing to alter the skewed distribution of income. So, will anything prevent inequality from widening?
The obvious answer is yes. But how society responds will mean the difference between a prosperous world and a world torn apart by slow growth and resentment.
Property rights are ultimately sanctioned by society, and, to the extent that they seem to be unfair, society has an incentive to change them. But will society see the software billionaire as having come by her wealth unfairly, or will it see her wealth as a fair reward for cleverness?
- More Here
Andreessen’s aim is to shock his listeners – not just for effect, but to get them to do something about it. To stop the world from being divided between a few alpha programmers and many drones, he wants the potential drones to stop taking easy liberal arts courses in college. Instead, he wants them to focus on courses in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), where the good jobs will be. But will this solve the problem that he poses?
Perhaps not.
Put differently, in a winner-take-all world, bringing up the average level of skills or education does nothing to alter the skewed distribution of income. So, will anything prevent inequality from widening?
The obvious answer is yes. But how society responds will mean the difference between a prosperous world and a world torn apart by slow growth and resentment.
Property rights are ultimately sanctioned by society, and, to the extent that they seem to be unfair, society has an incentive to change them. But will society see the software billionaire as having come by her wealth unfairly, or will it see her wealth as a fair reward for cleverness?
- More Here
No comments:
Post a Comment