4 ms·
I think the author's definition of capitalism is close to the Wikipedia version. "Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of pr
by ewzimm 10y ago
I think the author's definition of capitalism is close to the Wikipedia version. "Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit." What postcapitalists generally talk about is a shift in the means of production away from the industrial paradigm, leading to a shift away from private ownership and operation for profit. Private ownership of industrial manufacturing as the basis of economic power shifts to public ownership of information which is shared freely and used to generate value for society as a whole.
Since this quotes Marx, we can talk about a shift in a world conceptually defined by a struggle between an owner and a worker class to a world defined by a struggle between intellectual property advocates and advocates of freely shared information. As we've seen, it's very difficult for a working class to overthrow their oppressors without becoming even more oppressive than the oppressors. However, it's much easier for virally-spread free and open source software to overtake proprietary software. The prediction of postcapitalism is that this trend of unobscured information and therefore decentralized information will upend the traditional paradigm of owners and workers.
Taken to its extreme, the new working class will become entirely automated and humanity will collectively become owners of it. Just as today, some people in the upper class are better off than others. Those who keep secrets and private keys to valuable information spaces will have advantages over others for the forseeable future, and it's likely that this inequality will pass to machines as well. Eventually, as we move toward the development of artificial general intelligences, it's likely that processing power and access to information will be the most valuable distinguishers of power and influence.
- AndrewKemendo 10y agoHowever, it's much easier for virally-spread free and open source software to overtake proprietary software. I don't think this is true at all. If that were the case GNU Linux would dominate the computing world. Taken to its extreme, the new working class will become entirely automated and humanity will collectively become owners of it. Through what mechanism? I just don't see that happening because individuals don't have that much attention to devote to maintaining such a collective. Someone will always rise to the top to dominate and people will "elect" that person through their behaviors if not explicitly - in effect the same thing that we have today. it's likely that processing power and access to information will be the most valuable distinguishers of power and influence Correct. That just means only a tiny group of people (or trans-human people) will dominate.
- ewzimm 10y agoGNU Linux does dominate the computing world: servers, phones, and IoT, by far the majority of all hardware runs it. To your second point, I'm just describing a future in which almost all work is done by machines and humanity owns them collectively but not evenly. I mean collectively in the sense of all of humanity being pushed into the owner class and out of the working class, but power differences will persist. How those power differences play out is not determined. It could move either toward increasing centralization of power or increasing decentralization. That will be determined by the choices we are making now, which is why a lot of people want to consider the effects of current laws and politics on a theoretical postcapitalist world.
- Ace17 10y ago> GNU Linux does dominate the computing world: servers, phones, and IoT, by far the majority of all hardware runs it. Android contains Linux, but not GNU; thus, Android and GNU/Linux are mostly different, because all they have in common is Linux (Richard Stallman).
- ewzimm 10y agoI thought someone might say that and considered explaining further, but didn't want to get too bogged down in details to distract from the point. I don't completely agree with the distinction, even though Stallman is the authority. There's still a lot of GNU code used in most Android installations, and a full Debian install only requires installing and running an app. Maybe GNU-available/Linux would be a better name. Although the default is minimal free software, it's easy to add F-droid and anything else you want, because Linux is still GNU GPL-licensed and and still has the freedoms associated with it (despite restrictive baseband and other software.) So in the context of free software dominating hardware, it's still a good example.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]