'Broligarchs' Don't Want Science, They Want Entertainers to Entertain Them (and Make Them Richer)
People who rise quickly to fame and then quickly fall "out of fame" are typically in age-sensitive occupations/sectors such as sports (athletes, footballers etc.) or areas where moguls swap between "stars", either based on youth or perceived docility (very common in the film and music industries). Those people are sensitive to or prone to depression. Some resort to drugs and many die young because of overdose or drug-related health complications. Particular sports and particular music genres have very high rates of early deaths, with factors being mental strain of the activity, salaries, culture, and length of one's "prime".
In science and technology, age plays a "lesser" role. It's considered a less significant factor, but GAFAM et al. allegedly fire people based on their age (typically much higher than when athletes or models "spoil"). In the past we seldom heard things like, "this scientist is good, but he is already 50, so he is old and not worth listening to." At IBM, it seems rather blatantly obvious they marginalise "expensive" (read: experienced) workers.
In some sense the "high-tech" so-called 'industry' (transitioning from Computer Science to "IT") is becoming a bit like pop culture with performers. Only the "old horse" footballers can still be around in their 40s (in the "big leagues") and many people in "tech" (or "Tech" with capital T) are similarly canceled for one reason or another.
An inflow of cheap, young, docile (would do anything to gain and retain fame) professionals lowers the compensation or the average salary.
We see this all the time at the EPO, which is on strike.
Instead of seeking real inclusion and pursuit of science, today's "Tech" companies (with capital T) want hordes of obedient, overworked, desperate, uncovered/non-unionised workers.
Of course this will result in things getting worse in the sciences and everyone who relies on the sciences. █
Image source: Amy Winehouse
