3 ms·

Varoufakis was doing the hyperbole by saying "work for free" when he knows that people get some value. We can nit-pick the hyperbole, but the gist is still a fi

Varoufakis was doing the hyperbole by saying "work for free" when he knows that people get some value. We can nit-pick the hyperbole, but the gist is still a fine enough point about the value being mainly from the users and extracted for profit by the platforms. > Arguably, the current best economic theory basically says that because exchange takes place assuming users are rational enough, the exchanged value is identical. I'll take that argument. If that's the best economic theory, it just validates my assertion that the field of economics is mostly a farce. That "theory" is nothing but a say-so assertion that doesn't even try to look for evidence. It's unfalsifiable BS. Some platforms provide great value. But the world is full of cases of middle-men and gatekeepers that have worked their way into that position and are little more than extractive. They might as well not exist. The reason people choose to go through them is for the value they get from the end exchange, not because they prefer to go through the middle-man. It all depends on the particular cases. The phenomenon of rent-seeking middle-men is not some myth.

lostmsu 5y ago
What is the problem exactly with extracting value from easily available content created by many others? This is exactly what public education does, reading books, etc
- quadrangle 5y ago
  Are you arguing about techno-feudalism or just being defensive about anyone criticizing businesses? The whole discussion here is about the idea of power dynamics. It isn't about the boring waste-of-time topic of just attributing "value" conceptually. If you enjoy playing Mozart's music on the piano, that has "value" to you, but "extraction" is a poor metaphor, and there's no power dynamics at play, it's just life. The only thing interesting in this topic is the question of concentrated power and who has power to control decisions about how things are set up in society. Google has set up an arrangement where they are extremely profitable and a relatively small number of people get to decide how their platforms work, and the divided users only have the choice to take-it-or-leave-it (and network effects push them into it, schools and businesses and others use the systems, you better also, and the mere fact of all the value captured there makes it hard for competition to arise). This is a question of organizing, collective action etc. The executives at Google can make decisions and they have a whole organizational system to carry out their will. There's no organized power for the users. The label "techno-feudalism" doesn't argue that value doesn't exist or that the serfs are literal slaves.
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    Again, the Google Maps vs OSM shows that the majority prefers the value provided for them by Google over control over "how their platforms work". Perhaps they are being tricked into this, but that is a separate problem, which article does not address.

lostmsu 5y ago

What is the problem exactly with extracting value from easily available content created by many others? This is exactly what public education does, reading books, etc

quadrangle 5y ago
Are you arguing about techno-feudalism or just being defensive about anyone criticizing businesses? The whole discussion here is about the idea of power dynamics. It isn't about the boring waste-of-time topic of just attributing "value" conceptually. If you enjoy playing Mozart's music on the piano, that has "value" to you, but "extraction" is a poor metaphor, and there's no power dynamics at play, it's just life. The only thing interesting in this topic is the question of concentrated power and who has power to control decisions about how things are set up in society. Google has set up an arrangement where they are extremely profitable and a relatively small number of people get to decide how their platforms work, and the divided users only have the choice to take-it-or-leave-it (and network effects push them into it, schools and businesses and others use the systems, you better also, and the mere fact of all the value captured there makes it hard for competition to arise). This is a question of organizing, collective action etc. The executives at Google can make decisions and they have a whole organizational system to carry out their will. There's no organized power for the users. The label "techno-feudalism" doesn't argue that value doesn't exist or that the serfs are literal slaves.
- lostmsu 5y ago
  Again, the Google Maps vs OSM shows that the majority prefers the value provided for them by Google over control over "how their platforms work". Perhaps they are being tricked into this, but that is a separate problem, which article does not address.