4 ms·
In time, yes.
by ISL 8y ago
In time, yes.
- jrs95 8y agoI’m not so sure. With an ever closer relationship between global capital and governments, and advances in technology that could facilitate incredible levels of surveillance, any form of resistance against the status quo could be shut down far more effectively than it ever could have been in the past.
- rectang 8y agoYes, this is what I'm concerned about as well. We've entered another gilded age, with skyrocketing inequality. Some argue that's fine so long as all boats are rising. But with incredible wealth disparities come political power disparities, and I don't think it makes sense to acquiesce to relative marginalization even if in an absolute sense things are improving.
- extralego 8y agoIt certainly remains to be seen. The consequences of electronic media are unknowable. The scope alone is surely incalculable. Since the mid-20th century, American culture has revealed a notable propensity for sensational hampster-wheel architecture. Possibly not by coincidence, labor has been no match. Media, electronic or not dictate the extents of social functionality through an unknowably complex process. I think it can loosely be illustrated as a culture of preferred data structures in a software design. Redesigning the softare to adapt to a newly preferred data structure will require a radical refactoring. With software, we aim to understand that refactoring in order to implement it, which we do before it goes to production because we are individually punished if we do it after. But when adapting to a new media form, the punishments are expected to be received by society as a whole, and the individuals wasted by the process. Acknowledging the phenomenon depends on a mass of individual comprehensions working together to illustrate the threat. And that's only to acknowledge the the threat exists...