Come on. How many of these companies improve anyone's lives? I doubt the world is any better thanks to Twitter, or Facebook, or Foursquare, certainly not thanks to the various clones, mashups and "me three" companies you see in TechCrunch every day.
Alex provides enough information about his beliefs and about why he thinks those articles conflict with them that I, at least, trust he knows why he reacted the way he did.
What is the point of questioning his level of self-awareness anyway? How does it further the conversation? Really, I don't understand the point of maxklein's comment.
First, he takes issue with the phrase "vocal minority". OK, mISV people are either in the minority or the majority. Why does that matter either way?
Then he ignores the major premise of the article (which I find interesting), and instead psychologizes Alex from behind his computer. What's the point?
The main issue which Alex brings up is far more interesting. What should we value more, personal happiness or improving as many as lives as possible? What organizational structures are most suited to these different goals? Are these goals mutually exclusive, as Alex seems to assume they are?
Really? I've never met him, but I know plenty of other people who despite providing a lot of information about their beliefs aren't completely candid with themselves about why they're reacting the way they do.
They may not have been helpful to you but to others they are.
Governments are now using social media to track dissidents as well, so it's not at all clear the net effect it positive.
Note that the smaller Freckle/etc apps are the ones people actually pay for.
By the way, Lady Gaga is something people actually pay for. If I recall right, her personal income was $60M last year. Presumably people paid a lot more than that for her music/entertainment.
Before Gaga, people were paying for Madonna. After Gaga, people will be breathlessly excited and pay for someone else. If there was no Gaga, people would be breathlessly excited and pay for someone else yet.
How awesome is it that I can talk to old friends on Facebook (which does lead to in-person convo!), get great socially-vetted info on Twitter, or find local tips on Foursquare when traveling.
Okay - maybe Zynga is where I draw the line... ;-) it really does seem like like they're hacking our brains like that fluke* that causes ants to get eaten by animals to spread itself.
But still maybe that knowledge helps all of marketing by example...
And what about Groupon? Google? There are countless examples.
1980: I know people that met at a local Young Republicans mixer.
1975: I know people that met at a disco and/or roller derby
50,000 BC: I know people that met in a cave.