Jeff Bezos Steps Down as Amazon’s CEO After 27 Years(finance.yahoo.com)
finance.yahoo.com
Jeff Bezos Steps Down as Amazon’s CEO After 27 Years
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/jeff-bezos-steps-down-amazon-110000036.html
62 comments
Let's not conflate the Gates in Balmer era at Microsoft.
The Gates era produced some of the finest software Microsoft ever made, Windows 2000, Visual Studio and Office 2000. They had a real focus on developers, and developer support (remember when MSDN didn't suck?).
In spite of Balmer jumping up and down on stage yelling "Developers!!", he had no idea how to build a software company and subsequently nearly drove it into the ground.
The Gates era produced some of the finest software Microsoft ever made, Windows 2000, Visual Studio and Office 2000. They had a real focus on developers, and developer support (remember when MSDN didn't suck?).
In spite of Balmer jumping up and down on stage yelling "Developers!!", he had no idea how to build a software company and subsequently nearly drove it into the ground.
Let’s also recognize that while clearly both of these guys (Bezos and Gates) are clear outliers in talent and execution, they themselves did not build these companies and products alone. They were supported by thousands and thousands of people. And many of them coming up with the important ingredients that made it all happen.
Haha! Fair enough.
Although, to give Ballmer some credit, he inherited a lot of structural problems in the business, and I merged their eras because it was never very clear when Gates actually let go of all of the reigns.
Although, to give Ballmer some credit, he inherited a lot of structural problems in the business, and I merged their eras because it was never very clear when Gates actually let go of all of the reigns.
> In spite of Balmer jumping up and down on stage yelling "Developers!!" ...
If you actually know how to support developers you don't need to jump up and down on stage screaming about it.
If you actually know how to support developers you don't need to jump up and down on stage screaming about it.
In my mind, I compare Jeff Bezos with Bill Gates.
I have often disliked the practices of Microsoft, and don't think creating benevolent billionaires is the best way to solve the world's problems, but I have to credit the fact that Bill Gates has actually tried to change the world for the better through the Gates foundation.
In comparison, Jeff Bezos's aspiration to travel into space seems to me mawkish (to use the same word as Russell Brand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhMY23kgcKQ).
Jeff Bezos says that space "changes your relationship with this planet, this humanity, it's one earth". It seems to me completely out-of-touch with the reputation of Amazon.
I have often disliked the practices of Microsoft, and don't think creating benevolent billionaires is the best way to solve the world's problems, but I have to credit the fact that Bill Gates has actually tried to change the world for the better through the Gates foundation.
In comparison, Jeff Bezos's aspiration to travel into space seems to me mawkish (to use the same word as Russell Brand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhMY23kgcKQ).
Jeff Bezos says that space "changes your relationship with this planet, this humanity, it's one earth". It seems to me completely out-of-touch with the reputation of Amazon.
I disagree. How much innovation did we lose because of 90s Microsoft? We might be 5 years more advanced in tech if Bill Gates hadn’t been such an asshole. The same goes for Intel, Amazon, etc.. They're stifling innovation for their own personal gain.
In your view, what does tech advancement mean though? Its easier to discuss data, rather than argue over opinion. We did get better hardware, better client software from other vendors, etc. Or are you limiting innovation to mean they didn't improve their browser? Personally, I think the hardware wasn't ready in the 90s for full blown web-apps. Just look at the computing requirements of most websites today. For the hardware that I had in the 90s, I could barely play mp3's and run 1-2 apps without the audio skipping.
im not sure who said it, but theres a quote that said something like "in 150 years the world will not remember microsoft or any of these tech companies but they will remember the legacy of bill gates's philanthropy."
5 years of lost tech advancement means nothing to history.
5 years of lost tech advancement means nothing to history.
In 150 years people will absolutely remember Microsoft and Amazon, just like we remember standard oil, Carnegie steel, and bell. Though, I get the point of the statement.
[deleted]
What would we remember his philanthropy for? Is there something yet to come or are the mosquito nets the thing to remember?
Polio?
When you say, "creating benevolent billionaires", who or what do you think is doing the creating?
Gates is trying to help Monsanto get a strangle hold on farming in Africa.
Monsanto.
Monsanto.
There's so much hyperbole crammed into one statement that it's hard to provide much of a serious response. Where would I start?
How much is Bill Gates actually involved? Why is Monsanto so bad? What is the stranglehold? Are Africans not allowed their own agency here?
How much is Bill Gates actually involved? Why is Monsanto so bad? What is the stranglehold? Are Africans not allowed their own agency here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_saving#United_States
also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs
There's so much! Enjoy the read.
also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs
There's so much! Enjoy the read.
You made a claim and then simply dumped links leaving the reader to connect the dots. There is nothing in those links even close to what you were claiming. This is simply not a good way to engage in a discussion. $.02
Monsanto's villainous behaviour is well defined in those direct links. Bill's choice to work with them and the reasons that might be an issue are left as an exercise to the reader.
Sorry, you are not making any point or any sense. I understand you have an axe to grind, but in the very least you should be able to present any case whatsoever to defend your position based on tangible facts and real-world evidence.
If you have neither of that to present and feel compelled to hand-waive your way out of answering simple questions them that should be enough to make you reconsider what you are really doing and what problems you need to address.
If you have neither of that to present and feel compelled to hand-waive your way out of answering simple questions them that should be enough to make you reconsider what you are really doing and what problems you need to address.
There's no case, just facts. Gates is helping Monsanto. Monsanto is super evil (links above show that). Parent should add that stuff to his consideration for BG.
Do you have a source on that? I would think that would be spammed in every reddit/HN/lobsters thread if that were true.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matte...
For starters.
How about this? "Gates opposed waiving some provisions of the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS. A waiver would allow member nations to stop enforcing a set of COVID-19-related patents for the duration of the pandemic so that low- and middle-income countries can produce or import generic versions of vaccines.
Gates met with U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai last week to make the case for protecting these patents..."
https://www.devex.com/news/gates-foundation-reverses-course-...
https://www.salon.com/2021/04/26/bill-gates-says-no-to-shari...
He would rather poor people die than let IP rules be weakened, even for a a little while.
The reason you don't hear about it is because he is one of the wealthiest men in the world and he has a lot of power/influence. All that money buys really good PR.
I mean the guy strengthened his friendship with Jeffry Epstein AFTER he was released from jail for being convicted of procuring a child for prostitution.
For starters.
How about this? "Gates opposed waiving some provisions of the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS. A waiver would allow member nations to stop enforcing a set of COVID-19-related patents for the duration of the pandemic so that low- and middle-income countries can produce or import generic versions of vaccines.
Gates met with U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai last week to make the case for protecting these patents..."
https://www.devex.com/news/gates-foundation-reverses-course-...
https://www.salon.com/2021/04/26/bill-gates-says-no-to-shari...
He would rather poor people die than let IP rules be weakened, even for a a little while.
The reason you don't hear about it is because he is one of the wealthiest men in the world and he has a lot of power/influence. All that money buys really good PR.
I mean the guy strengthened his friendship with Jeffry Epstein AFTER he was released from jail for being convicted of procuring a child for prostitution.
Are you really trying to present a Guardian article with a straight face?
This is an example of the intellectual honesty that is presented in this sort of source:
> Who knows what this corporate-speak really means, but in all probability it heralds the big time introduction of GM soya in southern Africa.
And their smokin gun? An insignificant investment of 20M dollars from the Gates Foundation on Cargill.
If you really intend to sell your conspiracy theories as something somewhat credible, you should start by addressing the sources you pick to base your wild claims on.
This is an example of the intellectual honesty that is presented in this sort of source:
> Who knows what this corporate-speak really means, but in all probability it heralds the big time introduction of GM soya in southern Africa.
And their smokin gun? An insignificant investment of 20M dollars from the Gates Foundation on Cargill.
If you really intend to sell your conspiracy theories as something somewhat credible, you should start by addressing the sources you pick to base your wild claims on.
Yes.
The end of an era.
Jeff's concept of all of his workers being lazy has been pivotal in the concept of hiring to fire.
Jeff lead the way in his idea of firing people with cancer.
He lead in having the most people cry at their desk.
His concept of making people wear diapers instead of letting them go to the bathroom.
Don't get me wrong. I want my cheap stuff and to some degree they are the only game in town.
I do think that Amazon changed how we shop in a large way.
Jeff's concept of all of his workers being lazy has been pivotal in the concept of hiring to fire.
Jeff lead the way in his idea of firing people with cancer.
He lead in having the most people cry at their desk.
His concept of making people wear diapers instead of letting them go to the bathroom.
Don't get me wrong. I want my cheap stuff and to some degree they are the only game in town.
I do think that Amazon changed how we shop in a large way.
Say what you want about Amazon as a company, Jeff was a world-class operator and (relatively) drama free for 27 years.
I'm still holding out for a 'big reveal' on his vision for the 2nd half of his career - hopefully more than just an egotistical space race. The world is depending on him given his outsized influence and wealth.
I'm still holding out for a 'big reveal' on his vision for the 2nd half of his career - hopefully more than just an egotistical space race. The world is depending on him given his outsized influence and wealth.
“World class operator” while employees pee in bottles on the warehouse floor to meet quotas. That’s not a world class operator, that’s a world class tyrant.
Depends on who you ask, I guess. A large portion of our class has certainly moved to idolizing the owner/leader, rather than cheering for the laborer. It’s going to get worse before it gets better.
"It's going to get worse before it gets better"
Things seem to be just getting worse and worse. When does it get better, huh? I'm still waiting.
Things seem to be just getting worse and worse. When does it get better, huh? I'm still waiting.
Well, again that depends on your political stance. Some argue for reform, others for revolution, and yet others argue for some type of technological progress that could "solve things."
I think history shows that being passive seldom gives you any rewards, when looking at people grouped by ethnicity, class, gender, etc. No matter what you think of the worker's movements, they did produce unions that did bring huge benefits like vacation, paid parental leave, etc. Especially in Europe. This is an example of being "active" as a group towards another group, and then reaping some benefits from that.
I think we have seen a huge decline in activity from workers as a group, and an equal push of activity from big companies. Couple that with hugely increased globalization etc, and you soon get large factories where people piss in jugs while hoping to not get caught emptying their bladder without registering for taking a break, and it is going to get worse until some group actively decides to do something about this.
I think history shows that being passive seldom gives you any rewards, when looking at people grouped by ethnicity, class, gender, etc. No matter what you think of the worker's movements, they did produce unions that did bring huge benefits like vacation, paid parental leave, etc. Especially in Europe. This is an example of being "active" as a group towards another group, and then reaping some benefits from that.
I think we have seen a huge decline in activity from workers as a group, and an equal push of activity from big companies. Couple that with hugely increased globalization etc, and you soon get large factories where people piss in jugs while hoping to not get caught emptying their bladder without registering for taking a break, and it is going to get worse until some group actively decides to do something about this.
People act like peeing in bottles is so bad. I really don't get it. Have you never peed in a bottle? Like they have access to toilets for #2 which is great.
Ask anyone doing carpet cleaning or another home based trade. Where do you think they pee and poo? They dont do it in the clients home. They go in a bottle or into a bucket in the back of their van.
Ask anyone doing carpet cleaning or another home based trade. Where do you think they pee and poo? They dont do it in the clients home. They go in a bottle or into a bucket in the back of their van.
I’m focusing on peeing in a bottle because I think it’s particularly dehumanizing and humiliating part of amazon’s horrible labour practices.
And for the record, if you’re doing a job in my house, you can use my toilet. Whatever social stigmas there are around contractors and cleaners using the house toilet - those are the same classist and toxic forces that let people justify dehumanizing work.
And for the record, if you’re doing a job in my house, you can use my toilet. Whatever social stigmas there are around contractors and cleaners using the house toilet - those are the same classist and toxic forces that let people justify dehumanizing work.
> Ask anyone doing carpet cleaning or another home based trade. Where do you think they pee and poo?
Any time I have contractors working at my house, they use my bathroom like a human being.
What dystopian hellhole are you advocating for here?
Any time I have contractors working at my house, they use my bathroom like a human being.
What dystopian hellhole are you advocating for here?
I think (and hope) OP was being sarcastic
We shouldn’t be depending on people that ruthlessly exploit others to gain their wealth. We should be shunning them.
> Say what you want about Amazon as a company, Jeff was a world-class operator
If you're admitting critique of Amazon, you're admitting critique of Jeff Bezos. He could try to make it a great company for all stakeholders, instead we got abnoxious near monopoly that pushed out smaller retailers and lowered standards in all kinds of ways. Employees get shitty working conditions laced with work-harder propaganda, buyers have to use a shitty website with real products mixed with shitty fake products with faked reviews.
If you're admitting critique of Amazon, you're admitting critique of Jeff Bezos. He could try to make it a great company for all stakeholders, instead we got abnoxious near monopoly that pushed out smaller retailers and lowered standards in all kinds of ways. Employees get shitty working conditions laced with work-harder propaganda, buyers have to use a shitty website with real products mixed with shitty fake products with faked reviews.
> The world is depending on him given his outsized influence and wealth.
Bernie Sanders had a great response in a town forum where the panelist was trying to get him to acknowledge how grateful we should be for billionaires and their helping hand during the pandemic. What he said was, he thinks it is great that they (billionaires) are doing charity work, but the fact is, for a nation as rich as the United States, being thankful for billionaire hand outs is ridiculous.
We (developed nations) honestly shouldn't be in a situation where we rely on billionaires to prosper and be excited about it.
Bernie Sanders had a great response in a town forum where the panelist was trying to get him to acknowledge how grateful we should be for billionaires and their helping hand during the pandemic. What he said was, he thinks it is great that they (billionaires) are doing charity work, but the fact is, for a nation as rich as the United States, being thankful for billionaire hand outs is ridiculous.
We (developed nations) honestly shouldn't be in a situation where we rely on billionaires to prosper and be excited about it.
I guess he’s “drama free” in the same sense that Putin’s drama free. Not much room for drama when your average worker is too scared to speak up and anyone attempting to push back on inhumane conditions finds themselves fired before they even mange to speak to more than a dozen coworkers.
This is the problem of capitalism. The unrealistic reliance on benevolent billionaires to do what's best for society, and not what's in their own best interest to the detriment of society.
I see this less as an intrinsic problem with capitalism, and more of a failure for our government to do its job, protect citizens and enforce healthy boundaries in society.
Instead we have sweetheart deals and tax breaks.
I think it is intrinsic. Capital is just code for "power and control", the more money and capital you gain, the more persuasive power you have on everyone, including the government that should be regulating your behavior to the benefit of the people, and not specific corporate interests.
Nope, capital just means money.
Maybe it brings power and control, maybe it doesn’t. The two are not intrinsically linked.
There are people far more poor, and far more powerful than me in our current system.
Maybe it brings power and control, maybe it doesn’t. The two are not intrinsically linked.
There are people far more poor, and far more powerful than me in our current system.
In a system where you need money to survive, you inherently gain more power and more control with the more money you have.
Maybe these people have more "social capital" than you, but that doesn't go far if you can't survive.
The desperation economy is designed to keep a lot of monkeys dancing for peanuts.
Maybe these people have more "social capital" than you, but that doesn't go far if you can't survive.
The desperation economy is designed to keep a lot of monkeys dancing for peanuts.
On this, we agree.
There is not a "problem of capitalism" at all. There is no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. Capitalism if by far the best tool the world has ever seen for lifting massive amounts of people out of poverty and giving people the most amount of freedom. PERIOD. All other forms of government are more tyrannical and more corrupt than capitalism, without exception. You can absolutely have capitalism and a higher/better functioning government. Fist stop spending INSANE amounts of the budget on the military and "defense", instead spend it on helping your own people. Second, institute a VAT and an UBI. Third, actually support capitalism by updating and enforcing anti-trust laws. Problem solved.
> Fist stop spending INSANE amounts of the budget on the military and "defense", instead spend it on helping your own people.
Take a step back here. Why do you think a government ends up spending insane amounts of the budget on the military? Where do you think that money goes?
What you're seeing is the result of giant capitalist corporations producing weapons, logistics, etc. that have enough power to parasitize the government.
You can argue that it's a failure of government that it is able to be captured, or a failure of capitalism (or corporatism) that it does so. I don't find either argument particularly illuminating.
I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans.
Take a step back here. Why do you think a government ends up spending insane amounts of the budget on the military? Where do you think that money goes?
What you're seeing is the result of giant capitalist corporations producing weapons, logistics, etc. that have enough power to parasitize the government.
You can argue that it's a failure of government that it is able to be captured, or a failure of capitalism (or corporatism) that it does so. I don't find either argument particularly illuminating.
I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans.
>You can argue that it's a failure of government that it is able to be captured, or a failure of capitalism (or corporatism) that it does so. I don't find either argument particularly illuminating.
I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans
I couldn't agree with more and as a libertarian leaning centrist I wish I could blast this into every voter's mind.
As long as we have a corporate capture of the government, increased intervention and micromanagement of private markets will only exacerbate the problem (via regulatory capture, too big to fail, command economy, ect). There is no workable alternative to capitalism, but there is clear alternative to corrupt government.
Every problem with the system has a simple market solution which could be implemented with a government less susceptible to corporate influence.
Military budget too large > pass lower spending bills
Healthcare too expensive > allow Medicare to set prices based on health benefit.
Climate change > require goods & corporations to include costs of carbon remediation
As long as corporations exist, they will have incentives misaligned with the general public. Aligning corporate interest with that of society is impossible, so the only solution is to firewall government
I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans
I couldn't agree with more and as a libertarian leaning centrist I wish I could blast this into every voter's mind.
As long as we have a corporate capture of the government, increased intervention and micromanagement of private markets will only exacerbate the problem (via regulatory capture, too big to fail, command economy, ect). There is no workable alternative to capitalism, but there is clear alternative to corrupt government.
Every problem with the system has a simple market solution which could be implemented with a government less susceptible to corporate influence.
Military budget too large > pass lower spending bills
Healthcare too expensive > allow Medicare to set prices based on health benefit.
Climate change > require goods & corporations to include costs of carbon remediation
As long as corporations exist, they will have incentives misaligned with the general public. Aligning corporate interest with that of society is impossible, so the only solution is to firewall government
>Why do you think a government ends up spending insane amounts of the budget on the military?
Honestly? To maintain the value of our currency. The threat of Countries (looking at you Saudi Arabia) bailing on the so called "petro dollar" have caused our leaders to make terrible choices (like bombing the hell out of Yemen for decades). We are so scared of what would happen to our currency if the petro dollar went away we are basically a mercenary force to foreign countries.
> What you're seeing is the result of giant capitalist corporations producing weapons, logistics, etc. that have enough power to parasitize the government.
This is the symptom, not the disease. The problem isn't "giant capitalists" are producing weapons, it is that a market even exits for them.
>I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans.
I agree wit you on this.
Honestly? To maintain the value of our currency. The threat of Countries (looking at you Saudi Arabia) bailing on the so called "petro dollar" have caused our leaders to make terrible choices (like bombing the hell out of Yemen for decades). We are so scared of what would happen to our currency if the petro dollar went away we are basically a mercenary force to foreign countries.
> What you're seeing is the result of giant capitalist corporations producing weapons, logistics, etc. that have enough power to parasitize the government.
This is the symptom, not the disease. The problem isn't "giant capitalists" are producing weapons, it is that a market even exits for them.
>I think a better way to look at it is that we live in a capitalism+democratic system and that combined system clearly has some significant structural flaws. If we don't look at our government and private sector systems holistically and fix those flaws relatively soon, we won't have to, because they will have made the world uninhabitable for most humans.
I agree wit you on this.
You might be Interested in re reading about the 2018 congressional report on costs. There are a few HN articles on the topic. Here is an article to get started.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/201...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/201...
I don't think I was prescribing throwing it all out, but implementing UBI or needing heavy antitrust laws to enforce behavior suggests capitalism alone is not a solution by itself, it must be heavily regulated, and maybe supplemented with socialist/welfare policies. The problem is that capitalism often leads to regulatory capture, so we're left with crony capitalism.
You're conflating capitalism with systems of governance. As such, it is extremely difficult to untangle your argument. Can we please get a re-do?
Originally announced in Feb (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/02/jeff-bezos-to-step-down-as-a...) with exact date announced in May (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/26/jeff-bezos-to-formally-step-...)
It makes sense that he steps down, I have heard that he is leaving Earth.
He's going on a short couple of minute joyride that's equivalent to being launched in a cannon straight up.
[deleted]
Jeff's concept of the API mandate was such small and pivotal moment in technology, I may put it up there with Edison's lightbulb or James Watt's addition of the condenser to the steam engine.
There is a lot left if Bezos' career. There is no telling what he will do next or what his final legacy will be. But regardless, Amazon is quite a thing. It's not the biggest or wealthiest corporation on the planet, but it is far and away the most important right now.
It's quite a thing he made. It will be interesting to see what Amazon does without him.
(But again, I may have said the same thing about the Gates/Balmer era of Microsoft, but I think Microsoft has arguably done better since).