I find it strange that I hear a lot more reference to the "means of production" concept in marxism these days. I always thought it's a concept from the weakest

I find it strange that I hear a lot more reference to the "means of production" concept in marxism these days. I always thought it's a concept from the weakest parts of marxism. But besides that, it's an increasingly ethereal concept. In Marx' day, you could think of "means of production" as land, factories & tools mostly. At least, thinking of it in these few concrete terms related very closely to most of the economic activity around you. In a communist society, workers own the factory and farmers own the land, fairly concrete. Marx then suggests (as I said, I always though it was very weak) that a proletariate state would just own all means of production and workers in general would own it. So, he breaks from the simple and concrete concept pretty quickly. Still, at least you can picture what you're thinking of. But in today's world, what is Google's "means of production?" What's Apple's? HSBC's? Disney's? Uber's? Uber is more fiction-made-matter than a bunch of "capital." I find it surprising. I mean Marxism/Communism/Socialism has other concepts that I think are more relevant and less contrived that I'm surprised we don't hear more about. The idea of historical progression seems appropriate given the rate of change we see today. The Marxist revolutionary concept that when the majority don't have a stake in the status quo, revolutions happen... that seems relevant given the trends in inequality. Global solidarity. At least "labour power" isn't making its back way into general political vernacular.