4 ms·

I can agree with that sentiment up to a point. We're still better off now than before. Information is more generally available. If you want to publish online or

I can agree with that sentiment up to a point. We're still better off now than before. Information is more generally available. If you want to publish online or create software, nearly every resource is available. The Internet is its own paradigm of value. There are still specialized fields guarded by academic gatekeepers. However even there, knowledge is more widely available than before. Hypothetically speaking, if a researcher progressed to a high level in a traditionally academic field, the term "world class scientist" is a bit loaded. The rank of "world class" would most likely be determined by academic or other large institutions. If he acquired the knowledge without the receipts from an institution, he could easily be excluded. Therefore the gatekeeping to achieve this status is not strictly one of knowledge acquisition. It becomes a bit self-referential. >That story about the Nepali is not empirical data. It's an anecdotal story that keeps the working class distracted, and stops them from seeing how the system... I disagree strongly. It is that kind of can't do attitude that stops people from even starting. "How can I ever succeed, when the deck is stacked against me? The world is unfair, therefore I shouldn't even bother to try. Better to go back to wage based employment. I blame the system!" If that's the view you take, you'll never manifest success outside of the institutional paradigms you observe. No, the world isn't fair. The world has never been fair. Some will always have an advantage. That doesn't mean that Internet doesn't provide amazing opportunities for those who are willing. If you want different results, it stands to reason that you'll have to do something different. It is possible to escape day to day drudgery if you are willing, motivated and prepared to fail repeatedly.

beckman466 5y ago
> We're still better off now than before. I didn't claim we weren't? > Information is more generally available. If you want to publish online or create software, nearly every resource is available. The Internet is its own paradigm of value. I'd claim it's actually harder to be productive and to be exposed to the real problems facing the world. Today all of it is all hoarded, 'owned' and locked away by a small group of people. Just look at Shell oil company accurately predicting the devastating impacts of oil production and use back in the 1980’s, or big co’s burying of the early electric car (shown in ‘Who Killed The Electric Car’). Instead of the magical wonderful world capitalist firms promise in their advertisements, we live in a single-use non-modular black-box nature-killing hellworld. There is no universal invitation to follow your curiosity, no modularity and access to non-scarce resources (knowledge), despite us living with the most advanced technology we’ve ever had. All this knowledge commodification means people are kept from understanding the physics (or just, science, overall) of everyday tools and products, leading to high levels of alienation [1] (not to mention all the mental health effects of all this coercion and domination). I believe in a future where we can learn anything about anything. A world where we can physically take part in a myriad of different (democratic) open source production systems and processes, throughout our long lives. A world where our material accounting systems accurately reflect real-world scarcity, and not systems that upholds arbitrary laws that make life-saving tools, technology and science artificially scarce (and 'owned' by a very small group of people), and tries to shame and intimidate people for making a copy (e.g. shaming people in campaigns like: "You Wouldn’t Steal A Car. Piracy, It's a Crime") [2]. Today we live in a world where the tools humans need to work together are black boxes owned and created by billionaire property 'owners'. This is why I'm excited about the growth of the DWeb, because it's all about agent centricity. Some projects are starting to enable open apps whose public functions are hashed to create unique app DNA's that can evolve organically as the apps are implemented and used. It enables an ecology of distributed micro-service apps. We need to take back not just the internet, but the world. This is about creating human-friendly living spaces for all. Bike-able cities. Green spaces and gardens everywhere for kids and adults to play. Not a world where certain types of work are made artificially scarce and tied down to a specific place (e.g. knowledge work in Silicon Valley) because of a violent archaic claim system (the ‘Intellectual Property' system). > the term "world class scientist" is a bit loaded ‘World class‘ was bad word choice. I mean anyone with a STEM degree from a global north university that provided them access to the resources which are locked away for 99.999% of the working class. Someone who can command a big salary (as they're part of the labor aristocracy), as well as work on exciting research projects (much less alienating work). [1] Gabor Maté on alienation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs39tNLQss8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs39tNLQss8 [2] that’s why I am excited about Valueflo.ws by Mikorizal, and the holographic chain framework by the MetaCurrency project.

beckman466 5y ago

> We're still better off now than before. I didn't claim we weren't? > Information is more generally available. If you want to publish online or create software, nearly every resource is available. The Internet is its own paradigm of value. I'd claim it's actually harder to be productive and to be exposed to the real problems facing the world. Today all of it is all hoarded, 'owned' and locked away by a small group of people. Just look at Shell oil company accurately predicting the devastating impacts of oil production and use back in the 1980’s, or big co’s burying of the early electric car (shown in ‘Who Killed The Electric Car’). Instead of the magical wonderful world capitalist firms promise in their advertisements, we live in a single-use non-modular black-box nature-killing hellworld. There is no universal invitation to follow your curiosity, no modularity and access to non-scarce resources (knowledge), despite us living with the most advanced technology we’ve ever had. All this knowledge commodification means people are kept from understanding the physics (or just, science, overall) of everyday tools and products, leading to high levels of alienation [1] (not to mention all the mental health effects of all this coercion and domination). I believe in a future where we can learn anything about anything. A world where we can physically take part in a myriad of different (democratic) open source production systems and processes, throughout our long lives. A world where our material accounting systems accurately reflect real-world scarcity, and not systems that upholds arbitrary laws that make life-saving tools, technology and science artificially scarce (and 'owned' by a very small group of people), and tries to shame and intimidate people for making a copy (e.g. shaming people in campaigns like: "You Wouldn’t Steal A Car. Piracy, It's a Crime") [2]. Today we live in a world where the tools humans need to work together are black boxes owned and created by billionaire property 'owners'. This is why I'm excited about the growth of the DWeb, because it's all about agent centricity. Some projects are starting to enable open apps whose public functions are hashed to create unique app DNA's that can evolve organically as the apps are implemented and used. It enables an ecology of distributed micro-service apps. We need to take back not just the internet, but the world. This is about creating human-friendly living spaces for all. Bike-able cities. Green spaces and gardens everywhere for kids and adults to play. Not a world where certain types of work are made artificially scarce and tied down to a specific place (e.g. knowledge work in Silicon Valley) because of a violent archaic claim system (the ‘Intellectual Property' system). > the term "world class scientist" is a bit loaded ‘World class‘ was bad word choice. I mean anyone with a STEM degree from a global north university that provided them access to the resources which are locked away for 99.999% of the working class. Someone who can command a big salary (as they're part of the labor aristocracy), as well as work on exciting research projects (much less alienating work). [1] Gabor Maté on alienation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs39tNLQss8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs39tNLQss8 [2] that’s why I am excited about Valueflo.ws by Mikorizal, and the holographic chain framework by the MetaCurrency project.