5 ms·
Last time I checked, science and technology had already solved problems like clean water, sanitation and medicine. In fact, they were solved decades ago. The fa
by stupidcar 10y ago
Last time I checked, science and technology had already solved problems like clean water, sanitation and medicine. In fact, they were solved decades ago. The failure of political and social institutions to consistently implement and maintain these solutions isn't the fault of the the inventors.
What's more, when tech people like Zuckerberg and Thiel start trying to get involved in politics, they're crucified in the media by writers just like the author of this article, depicted as arrogant, inhuman idiots, who shouldn't dare to step outside the technology ghetto.
Articles like this having nothing to do with the issues they're supposedly championing, as the author's complete lack of insight into said issues demonstrates. Rather, they're part of a campaign by entrenched elites to resist the shift in power away from members of old industries to newer ones.
Executives from the oil, finance, legal, etc. industries have long enjoyed privileged access to power, and a smooth route from the private sector into politics. Now technology execs are starting to do the same thing, and the establishment is fighting back. This kind of astroturfing is an attempt to reassert the traditional dominance of STEM by non-STEM interests: E.g. "These people and companies should work on what we [non-STEM observers] think they should work on, because we understand the world better, and we know better than them what is needed. And we'll do whatever it takes to turn wider society against them if they don't obey us."
- nickpinkston 10y agoI mostly agree with you, but how is this astroturfing? As in, who is either directly paying for / causing this article to be published? It seems like this is just a traditional person supporting traditional things - i.e. actual support, not astroturfed.
- fersc 10y agoWho's deciding what media the masses develop their choices around?
- nickpinkston 10y agoThat's not what astroturfing is though. It's about faking grassroots activity. I don't see this sentiment as being some proverbial Koch brothers entity trying to show fake support to undermine tech. It's reflecting what a lot of people feel right now. I think you're making a more "Manufacturing Consent" [1] analysis, but in this case, Wired's money comes from tech people and those who serve them, not the "traditional" elites and humanists whose opinion this article represents. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
- RodericDay 10y agoI'm an engineer and software developer, and I push back against "tech execs" doing the same stuff that Oil and Finance execs do because I feel partially responsible for their clout. I hate how Zuckerberg co-opts the optimism behind stuff like "free internet!" into bald-facedly cynical for-profit initatives like internet.org. I have nothing good to say about Thiel or Palantir. The article captures how I feel fairly well, and I'm not an external agent pushing to retain control or whatever conspiracy you've cooked up down there in your last paragraph.
- fersc 10y agoHe's not theorizing conspiracies, imo he's simply explaining how business men are unqualified for their jobs. They don't make well informed decisions. Neither do politicians. STEM based tech company execs are going to change that.
- Hydraulix989 10y agoYes, this article is just clickbait, and I'm sad to see Wired stooping so low to express a very unpopular opinion that their journalists themselves don't (and shouldn't) hold -- one that even defies the very purpose of Wired itself, just for the sake of creating controversy. They've successfully trolled us all though, given that they managed to top HN. It's not astroturfing, but it IS gaslighting.