3 ms·

What a joke. Big Tech too powerful? How about the military industrial complex? Pharmaceutical companies? THE BANKS? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ITSELF? No, tho

What a joke. Big Tech too powerful? How about the military industrial complex? Pharmaceutical companies? THE BANKS? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ITSELF? No, those are all OK because they fit the agenda of total control. Technology is the only industry putting up a fight, the only industry that is solving problems for people instead of creating them. Can't have that.

jMyles 11y ago
Don't forget big ag, "major" media, and the private prisons / police unions. They're big players too, and the entirety of their influence isn't evident by their market caps. > only industry putting up a fight Firearms? Gun companies are starting to refuse to sell to police in states where ownership by other citizens is prohibited. And, predictably, we're suddenly in the middle of a "gun control" debate, despite firearms deaths and especially murders on a steady decline over decades.
danenania 11y ago
This. Our society happily tolerates so many entrenched monopolies and cartels that are actively hostile to their customers and blatantly manipulate government to keep competitors out. The tech industry is the least of our worries.
- bsbechtel 11y ago
  While true, the main concern I have with tech companies becoming too powerful is their access and control of personal data. This becomes even more concerning when they're so big they have significant data on individuals who actively avoid their services.
itstriz 11y ago
If you follow Reich, you'll see he shares your concern about military industrial complex, big pharma, and "too big too fail" banks.
jazzyk 11y ago
I agree. But I think you are missing the fact that all the big tech companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. went to the dark side a while ago. They have become big corps looking to squeeze proftis/blood out of a stone. So the article is really about the old guard having to contend with the newcomers.
forgottenpass 11y ago
You don't think that those others are solving problems for people? If they weren't, they'd be easy to unseat, or more likely would collapse under their own weight. Are there all sorts of undesirable consequences of their success? Of course! But tech isn't exempt from that. And even if, for the sake of argument, the undesirable side effects of tech's businesses was magically orders of magnitude less than any other segment, it's not unreasonable to talk about it in addition to the others. The thing about "Big Tech" is that you think the word "Tech" has anything to do with technology. It doesn't. It's just how the companies in question managed to get into a position of power. At the level of business this article deals in, it's just an identifier for a market segment. Tech business is no longer the scrappy young underdog doing good and fighting the good fight. Sometimes their interests align with the people's and we benefit when they fight to protect their interests. But they also fight to protect their interests when they're at odds with the end user's best interests.
throwaway2048 11y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutery or in this case "howaboutery" Claims of hypocracy or some kind of inconsistent total position say absoutely nothing meaningful or interesting about the claims somebody makes, and are frankly, a really stupid reason to dismiss them. Especially when the claimed inconsistency is so massively general that they can apply to anybody that somehow dosent like something about "the system". Don't like the amount of corporate money in politics? Well you surely buy things from corporations! How can you justify such an obviously inconsistent position!

jMyles 11y ago

Don't forget big ag, "major" media, and the private prisons / police unions. They're big players too, and the entirety of their influence isn't evident by their market caps. > only industry putting up a fight Firearms? Gun companies are starting to refuse to sell to police in states where ownership by other citizens is prohibited. And, predictably, we're suddenly in the middle of a "gun control" debate, despite firearms deaths and especially murders on a steady decline over decades.

danenania 11y ago

This. Our society happily tolerates so many entrenched monopolies and cartels that are actively hostile to their customers and blatantly manipulate government to keep competitors out. The tech industry is the least of our worries.

bsbechtel 11y ago
While true, the main concern I have with tech companies becoming too powerful is their access and control of personal data. This becomes even more concerning when they're so big they have significant data on individuals who actively avoid their services.

itstriz 11y ago

If you follow Reich, you'll see he shares your concern about military industrial complex, big pharma, and "too big too fail" banks.

jazzyk 11y ago

I agree. But I think you are missing the fact that all the big tech companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. went to the dark side a while ago. They have become big corps looking to squeeze proftis/blood out of a stone. So the article is really about the old guard having to contend with the newcomers.

forgottenpass 11y ago

You don't think that those others are solving problems for people? If they weren't, they'd be easy to unseat, or more likely would collapse under their own weight. Are there all sorts of undesirable consequences of their success? Of course! But tech isn't exempt from that. And even if, for the sake of argument, the undesirable side effects of tech's businesses was magically orders of magnitude less than any other segment, it's not unreasonable to talk about it in addition to the others. The thing about "Big Tech" is that you think the word "Tech" has anything to do with technology. It doesn't. It's just how the companies in question managed to get into a position of power. At the level of business this article deals in, it's just an identifier for a market segment. Tech business is no longer the scrappy young underdog doing good and fighting the good fight. Sometimes their interests align with the people's and we benefit when they fight to protect their interests. But they also fight to protect their interests when they're at odds with the end user's best interests.

throwaway2048 11y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutery or in this case "howaboutery" Claims of hypocracy or some kind of inconsistent total position say absoutely nothing meaningful or interesting about the claims somebody makes, and are frankly, a really stupid reason to dismiss them. Especially when the claimed inconsistency is so massively general that they can apply to anybody that somehow dosent like something about "the system". Don't like the amount of corporate money in politics? Well you surely buy things from corporations! How can you justify such an obviously inconsistent position!