May 26, 2022

Welcome to gaming-updates Exchange, a weekly startup and marketplace newsletter. it’s inspired Daily gaming-updates+ Speakers From which he got his name. In your mailbox every Saturday? subscribing HereI

The tech news this week has been interesting, to say the least. The fact that we started the week learning that Elon Musk had bought a physical percentage of Twitter stock, spent a period in the middle of the week learning that he had joined the board, and ended on Friday, we were busy reading how the staff handled this case. .

But better than not, and the saga has given us a lot to think about. Today I want to look at this issue from the point of view of voting rights.

A lot of what we’ve seen in recent years is multi-class startup stocks. Simply put, multi-class shares exist when investors and founders form a class of shares that gives them more votes per share than is offered by the company’s other smaller types of shares. It takes some work, which includes concentrating power in fewer hands. In extreme cases, multi-class stock configurations can leave the founder in full control of the company forever.

Facebook is one such company. Not Twitter.

The difference between the two companies is not silent. Facebook is struggling to rebuild itself under the same leader that brought it early success, while Twitter, on the other hand, is now run by a non-founder and has added a dubious power user to its board. These are very different results for the listed social networks.

It brings us something that makes me laugh. If I understand current technological tribalism, then even Elon Musk and those most admired by his own brand of capitalism advocate the use of multi-class stocks to run companies. Or, to put it simply, the people who have no problem owning all the cards with the Facebook CEO are also the ones who are excited about what Musk can do on Twitter.

This is an example of, I think, intellectual dissonance, and an example that makes me ask those who share my point of view whether the creation of a monarchical corporate governance is a bad choice in the long run. a very rich crap poster arrogated to himself a seat on the board of directors of twitter through the creative use of his checkbook, does this change our understanding of corporate governance and shareholder voting rights beyond illusory importance

new. Not necessary. Elon works with active shareholders, and that’s okay, even if some people find him as obnoxious as some find him a mixture of visionary and role model.

What will Musk bring to Twitter? Who knows. But at least it will be entertaining.

Empowerment of non-developers

My Friend and colleague Ron Miller This week I wrote about the Salesforce project, which allows people to write code by interacting with computers. I recommend that you read it. This reminded me a lot of what GitHub recently created to allow developers to submit code as they type. It seems that tools for boring development tasks are coming soon.

Neat tech from Salesforce and Microsoft, the parent company of GitHub, won’t put pressure on developers. The hard work they do will continue to be in high demand. Instead, consider a coding tool from the point of view of people who don’t code every day, but sometimes need it to get their job done. For them, the market, as it were, removes obstacles from their path.

Between the advent of no-code and low-code services and the aforementioned challenges of more automated code generation, we are slowly moving towards a future where development work will be more beginner-friendly and even more so. . he can unlock very human potential. And perhaps even reduce the burden on developers on a marginal basis.

In general, I am delighted with this technical work. Let’s give more power to as many people as possible. It will be good for humanity as a whole.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.