>slowly lose market share over decades, end up doing nothing and yet more profitable and more valuable than ever

>SpaceX

SpaceX has been gaining market share, not losing, and its primary business is Starlink, of which most customers are consumers.

(there is also Starshield)

I think software, paradoxically, has deeper network and intertial effects than pretty much anything else we have invented so far. Compare the leverage it enables to the ecosystem lock in it forces.

With physical goods, it's not nearly that coupled.

Microsoft's main business... is extracting money from the government.

Please, elaborate on where Microsoft is getting a hundred billion dollars plus per year from the government.

By an extreme margin Microsoft's main business is productivity software sold to businesses and consumers and has been for 40 years, along with Windows (the majority customers for which are businesses + consumers).

What's fascinating to me is just how many people in the American tech industry are in complete denial about the amount of government support their industry receives and by extension that they personally receive.

All too often someone who espouses libertarian or ultra free-market capitalist beliefs will smugly state that Silicon Valley is proof that America and free market ideals are better than another country such as say Norway, Finland, or Estonia.

I've never really had a good way to respond to that kind of belief in part because I'm not too well versed in the history of intelligence agencies funding American tech industries or the contemporary state of that relationship but also because it's so startlingly ubiquitous and adamant.

Does anyone else have any input on how it's best to address this misconception and worldview that people in SV have?