You must log in or register to comment.
The only way is to build technologies that allow humans to escape the capitalist system and allow us to build our own communities in direct opposition to capitalist greed and exploitation.
In a capitalist economy, corporations act within the free market established by the government. Government is responsible for establishing fair and transparent ways of doing business, such as maintaining a currency, and legal and accounting frameworks. But that’s not enough.
The article has a good starting point about breaking up monopolies to reestablish competition. We’ve let so many monopolies grow in the last few decades, to our detriment.
But that’s not enough. It’s also governments role to incorporate externalities into the market so corporate actions are fairly priced instead of costing society, and to ensure the market is working for the citizens. As prime examples, corporations need to bear the costs of resource extraction or an imposition on the environment. How could the free market work effectively, if some corporations are allowed to impose costs on society that are not priced into their goods? They’re effectively being subsidized, given an unfair advantage against their competitors, while also working against the future of the citizens forming this market.
But a fair market is only fair, if all the participants have standing, including the consumers who are the focus of the market, and workers who make it all happen. Currently we’ve let corporation ps dominate other roles in the market, we’re following a corporate economy and of course are not happy with the results. For example, consider “terms of service” imposed for just about everything these days. They’re always phrased as a contract and as if customers agree, yet are completely one sided, imposed without recourse or even any reasonable standard for a legal contract, and without any real choice. How can that be called a free market?
We could go a long way toward a free market that serves society if government does it’s part of establishing fairness, transparency, honesty for all entities in that market, and remembering that both governments and the market serve society, rather than the other way around
Most of the venture capital that fueled the techno booms were Russian - hence all this dumb “Let’s make everything family friendly!” (anti-LBGTQ, anti-NSFW) mindset. Now that money is going … elsewhere.
Source: my tinfoil hat
No, you don’t understand. The tin foil hat protects me from the government brainwashing 5g cell towers.
Those things are useful as fuck. At first they blocked mind controlling aliens. Then it also worked against mind-reading NSA. And now it blocks brainwashing 5G. The DoD must be spending trillions to bypass tinfoil technology.
If people stopped using tech to exploit people they would stop feeling exploited by it
“People” is a great word. Who do you mean exactly for these roles? Who’s doing what here?
As usual, most people who have control of how technology is used on a broad scale are in positions of power suitable for exploitation. That is, the people I’m talking about are business owners and high-level executives (and the government) using technology to exploit workers. To be fair, that’s not always the dynamic-- “normal” people can exploit each other too, and businesses and the government can as well. But it is the most pressing issue imo, because of the power imbalance. See also rent comtrol algorithms, automated insurance claim denials, etc.
Round up all MBAs and put them in reeducation camps
Raze Silicon Valley to the ground and start over?
No: the bad guys will build another one.
However if 250 million Americans each spent 400 hours less on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube in the next 12 months, the shareholders might have the heads of many members of those corporate boards on pikes.
That just makes it even easier for Wall St to enshittify whatever comes after
Ugh I hate that you’re right. Until we figure out capitalism we’re fucked.
I think you wanted to write “democratic communism” 😏😂
Don’t need to take things further than market socialism to fix the problems with capitalism.
Build anarcho-communism, thereby removing any incentives to enshittify.
It’s a rather bold claim to be able to create a system where you can achieve more power honestly than cannibalizing others. It’s a good ideal goal, of course, and people are optimizing for it, but no, that’s not a realistic solution.
I always find it very funny when someone suggests anarcho-something as a solution to all of capitalism’s problems. How exactly do you plan to enforce that? Do you think social pressure & shunning will do anything more than create a class of extremists with an oppositional philosophy?
Stop tariffs on new technologies
Get rot economists out of tech companies and return to private ownership.
When I see technology actively making the world consistently better rather than constantly trashing the ecosystem that literally keeps us alive, I’ll have optimism about it.
Anti-capitalist regulations, I imagine.
Anti monopoly and regulations against anti competitive practices are cornerstones of capitalism ensuring free and fair competition.
So no, what we need is a return back to when these practices weren’t allowed, away from allowing these things more than ever as we do now.
It’s easy to see Russia has become an oligarchy, why can’t we see it’s happening to us too?
But we can’t dismantle capitalism altogether, without creating an even bigger monopoly problem, the monopoly being corrupt governments like the soviet union and their 5 year plan economy, that very obviously wasn’t a very good concept.Maybe that’s what you meant, I’d just not call it anti-capitalism, when regulations are for the purpose of making capitalism work better.
So just “regulation” is better.Regulations only exist because Capitalism would consume itself without guardrails.
I wonder if it’s consuming itself a bit right now.
Late stage capiyalims, Baybee!
deleted by creator
No unregulated capitalism is super capitalism.
Regulated capitalism is capitalism we actually try to get to work as intended or “normal” capitalism.
Social democracy is “Caring” capitalism. Where free markets and capitalism still exist, but is regulated to prevent exploitation of ordinary people.Normal capitalism has a drive to become super capitalism. You can try to stop it, maybe you’ll succeed, but it will always strive to turn itself into super capitalism.
That’s why they do regulatory capture to prevent that from happening. It all starts with money being equal to influence. This can temporarily be reset after a big crash of the system but sooner or later they start again.
Let me tell you about the Nordic model
Repubtard: HEY THAT’S SOCIALISM!!!
Except Scandinavians have more freedom, and better free market than USA.
Repubtard: BUT IT’S SOCIALISM!!!
Ehrm, they also have better freedom of speech.
Repubtard: WHAT? ARE YOU A FUCKING COMMIE?
Actually they also rank way higher on democracy.
Repubtard: WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?
I don’t, but wouldn’t it be nice if everybody had healthcare, free education and social security so you didn’t have to fear to starve if you got ill and lost yopur job?
Repubtard: HEY THAT’S SOCIALISM!!!
…
Ugh, my elderly neighbor was going on about how Harris was going to take away this and that, most of which I’d never heard her say or even read about her plans doing, and I said, “where did you hear that? It was Fox News wasn’t it?” He replied with, “well, what news do you watch?” I said, “it sure isn’t Fox where they lie constantly. Harris hasn’t said any of that crap … you need to get your news from multiple sources.”
We’d be a heck of a lot better off if the news agencies were held accountable for telling lies and making up stories. Yeah, I know it’s a fine line but it’s one I’m willing to walk at this point.
We’d be a heck of a lot better off if the news agencies were held accountable for telling lies
Yes, other countries have that, it’s called responsible journalism.
You can’t just parrot some source, and claim it’s reporting. You need to check your sources.
When they help spread lies, they are part of the problem.What is your elderly neighbor’s view on Republican policies for the elderly compared to the Democrats; and does Fox care more about their elderly viewers half as much as their younger viewers—i.e. the ones who justify more money from advertisers?
In 30 years, Trump will be as cited by Republicans as much as Reagan is today—i.e. rarely if ever—probably less—Reagan at least won twice and in one election he won 49 states—as did Nixon in 1972—and back then, Nixon was about the same age as Harris is now.
Did your elderly neighbour support Ross Perot back in 1992?
a Texan speaks:
Ross Perot [Independent] 1992 Campaign Ad “Snapshot - :60”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naHdnyogJjA
1:02
I wonder if a typical Republican could point out Sweden on a map.
I’ll be optimistic about technology when the last techbro is strangled with the entrails of the last angel investor
Anarcho-transhumanism, or ig more open source innovations unsullied by the profit motive would-be nice.
Open source.
The technological innovations of the last fifteen years, from advertising enshittifcation to AI cheating, have largely been a disaster. We are sadly at the point where, as Ted Gioia says, “most so-called innovations are now anti-progress by any honest definition.” I dare say that if we could revert all digital technology to where it was in 2009 – before the invention of the retweet – we’d all be better off.
I’d go back even further (to 2007) before the invention of the iPhone. The smartphone has, arguably, IMO been a bad, or at least premature invention. It created a generation of kids obsessed with their photographies, giving girls eating disorders and creating/spreading unrealistic beauty ideals, etc… Also it has severely disrupted teenagers’ social living, created sleeping disorders, chronic doomscrolling, addiction, and more bad stuff. The iPhone was, IMO, not ready for this world.
