4 ms·
The author implies that the gap is due to lack of diffusion and that this is a problem that should be addressed and corrected. I think that the real issue is mu
by golemotron 11y ago
The author implies that the gap is due to lack of diffusion and that this is a problem that should be addressed and corrected. I think that the real issue is much simpler:
Technology has made manufacturing, services, mass communication, and markets much more efficient. When they are efficient, competition creates fewer winners and the winners win big.
If you want to understand inequality understand that. This is fundamental economics. We can dream of a world where there are 1500 different brands of phone each having close to equal market share but when one gains advantage, the advantages multiply and you end up with one or two major phone manufacturers. Propping up the other ones is nice, and may do some local good, but it's Sisyphean - it won't change the dynamics.
- noir_lord 11y agoThe end goal of capitalism is one corporation selling you air. I'm pro-capitalist (not least because it works) but also pro-market regulation, capitalism should be harnessed for the good of everyone not just a few.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoI think you might be interested in this article on the end of capitalism: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-... "Postcapitalism is possible because of three major changes information technology has brought about in the past 25 years. First, it has reduced the need for work, blurred the edges between work and free time and loosened the relationship between work and wages. The coming wave of automation, currently stalled because our social infrastructure cannot bear the consequences, will hugely diminish the amount of work needed – not just to subsist but to provide a decent life for all. Second, information is corroding the market’s ability to form prices correctly. That is because markets are based on scarcity while information is abundant. The system’s defence mechanism is to form monopolies – the giant tech companies – on a scale not seen in the past 200 years, yet they cannot last. By building business models and share valuations based on the capture and privatisation of all socially produced information, such firms are constructing a fragile corporate edifice at odds with the most basic need of humanity, which is to use ideas freely. Third, we’re seeing the spontaneous rise of collaborative production: goods, services and organisations are appearing that no longer respond to the dictates of the market and the managerial hierarchy. The biggest information product in the world – Wikipedia – is made by volunteers for free, abolishing the encyclopedia business and depriving the advertising industry of an estimated $3bn a year in revenue."
- hellameta 11y agoI'm not sure whether I agree or not but thank you for sharing that article. Very interesting.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoI appreciate your polite reply.
- kwhitefoot 11y agoIs this what you had in mind: See George England, "The Air Trust", http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12826 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12826
- noir_lord 11y agoYes but I'd not seen that book, no such thing as an original idea I guess, I was thinking more of Nestle and their attempts to control water supplies.
- crdoconnor 11y agoIt's not much different to what happened at the beginning of the 20th century. A few firms have managed to gain a lot of market dominance and have leveraged that to grow even further. If antitrust law were actually enforced suddenly all of this "efficient technology" would stop creating such big winners.