3 ms·

On the other hand, the government is a true monopoly (for good reason) so you can't just stop being their "customer" whenever you like. You may end up spending

On the other hand, the government is a true monopoly (for good reason) so you can't just stop being their "customer" whenever you like. You may end up spending your entire life oppressed by your fellow citizens who may be indifferent towards your needs. So I think there is a good reason for not having the government directly run everything. It wouldn't even mean democratic control over everything. It would mean bureaucratic control, very indirectly influenced by a democratic choice between a handful of parties once every 4 or 5 years. Both government and voluntary agreements between individuals and companies have their place. What governments should do is make sure that our interaction with Google and other tech giants is indeed voluntary and transparent.

maigret 6y ago
Turns out it's surprisingly hard to stop being a Google customer, if not impossible. I advise you to check the series by Kashmir Hill if you haven't yet: https://gizmodo.com/i-cut-the-big-five-tech-giants-from-my-life-it-was-hel-1831304194 https://gizmodo.com/i-cut-the-big-five-tech-giants-from-my-l...
- vageli 6y ago
  From the article, it doesn't sound _too_ hard to not be a customer of any of the companies (and I was Google-free for a long while until I had to use an Android for work purposes); what is difficult is not interacting with any customers of these companies in addition to not interacting with the companies themselves. This person didn't use Signal, for instance, because it is hosted on AWS. That's like saying you'll stop visiting shops that have Verizon Business internet or similar, which to me seems very different from just trying to cut Verizon out of your life.
eru 6y ago
> It wouldn't even mean democratic control over everything. It would mean bureaucratic control, very indirectly influenced by a democratic choice between a handful of parties once every 4 or 5 years. Even direct democratic control would be a nightmare. In practice the bureaucratic layer probably tempers the worst excesses.
- fauigerzigerk 6y ago
  That's probably true as long as a particular bureaucracy isn't too corrupt.

maigret 6y ago

Turns out it's surprisingly hard to stop being a Google customer, if not impossible. I advise you to check the series by Kashmir Hill if you haven't yet: https://gizmodo.com/i-cut-the-big-five-tech-giants-from-my-life-it-was-hel-1831304194 https://gizmodo.com/i-cut-the-big-five-tech-giants-from-my-l...

vageli 6y ago
From the article, it doesn't sound _too_ hard to not be a customer of any of the companies (and I was Google-free for a long while until I had to use an Android for work purposes); what is difficult is not interacting with any customers of these companies in addition to not interacting with the companies themselves. This person didn't use Signal, for instance, because it is hosted on AWS. That's like saying you'll stop visiting shops that have Verizon Business internet or similar, which to me seems very different from just trying to cut Verizon out of your life.

eru 6y ago

> It wouldn't even mean democratic control over everything. It would mean bureaucratic control, very indirectly influenced by a democratic choice between a handful of parties once every 4 or 5 years. Even direct democratic control would be a nightmare. In practice the bureaucratic layer probably tempers the worst excesses.

fauigerzigerk 6y ago
That's probably true as long as a particular bureaucracy isn't too corrupt.