this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
341 points (93.6% liked)

Technology

60074 readers
3252 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Short term is all that matters. Business fails? Start another one, and now you have a bunch of people that you made unemployed creating downward pressure on labor prices.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

No, you have a lot of people you made unemployed competing with you.

This is already what's happening in the video game industry. A ton of people have lost their jobs, and VC money has recently come pouring in trying to flip the displaced talent into the next big success.

And they'll probably do it. A number of the larger publishers are really struggling to succeed with titles that are bombing left and right as a result of poor executive oversight on attempted cash grabs to please the short term market.

Look at Ubisoft's 5-year stock price.

Short term is definitely not all that matters, and it's a rude awakening for those that think it's the case.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Mostly the execs don't care. They've extracted "value" in the form of money and got paid, that's the extent if their ability to look forward. The faster they make that happen the faster they can do it again, probably somewhere else. They don't give a single shit what happens after.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It really depends on the exec.

Like most people, there's a range.

Many are certainly unpleasant. But there's also ones that buck the trend.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, and there are a few good lawyers and a few good cops and (probably) a few good politicians too, but we're not talking about the few exceptions here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well, we kind of are as the shitty ones tend to fail after time and the good ones continue to succeed, so in a market that's much more competitive because of a force multiplier on labor unlike anything the world has seen there's not going to be much room for the crappy execs for very long.

Bad execs are like mosquitos. They thrive in stagnant waters, but as soon as things get moving they tend to reduce in number.

We've been in a fairly stagnant market since around 2008 for most things with no need for adaptation by large companies.

The large companies that went out of business recently have pretty much all been from financial mismanagement and not product/market fit like Circuit City or Blockbuster from the last time adaptation was needed with those failing to adapt going out of business.

The fatalism on Lemmy is fairly exhausting. The past decade shouldn't be used as a reference point for predicting the next decade. The factors playing into each couldn't be more different.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

I just want to say I appreciate your informed opinions in contrast to the doom and gloomerism combined with class warfare that is so pervasive here.