5 ms·

Unless and until we get real competitive markets in technology the enormous potential will lay dormant in the machinations and "visions" of a handful of power c

Unless and until we get real competitive markets in technology the enormous potential will lay dormant in the machinations and "visions" of a handful of power centers. Techies just dont realise how extremely concentrated this domain and how this deprives from unlocking possibilities. With billions of users there are potential markets for all sorts of devices. You are not going to see them for as long as the dinosaurs stomp on any sign of competition.

sofixa 3y ago
I hope the Digital Markets and Digital Services Acts from the EU will help push in the right direction towards proper competition.
- rakoo 3y ago
  Capitalism endgame is monopoly, any sufficiently old market ends in a n-opoly. Competition doesn't work, we've been trying that for centuries already and this is where we are. Companies' goal isn't to better people's lives, it's to widen their profit margins. What do you think will change if we add more competition that hasn't worked until today ?
  - nologic01 3y ago
    At least on paper, capitalism is not synonymous with oligarchy. All these corporate entities rely for their existence and "profitability" on a legal system, a security apparatus, on vital for their operations utilities such monetary systems, educational institutions etc. etc. that are bankrolled by the collective. Corporate legal entities are merely granted a license to operate within defined sandboxes. If society and its politics refuses to design sandboxes that will serve it well we should not expect to see the benefits of the invisible hand or whatever positive attributes might be associated with the design. It is not rocket science. The first and most powerful rule which is related to this discussion is simply: don't give any toddler too big a sandbox. It gets on their head and the outcome is that the entire family suffers.
    - rakoo 3y ago
      This supposes that the sandbox (ie the State) is somehow neutral and independent, which it isn't: in all democracies, the State has always been made by the bourgeoisie, for the bourgeoisie. Only the fact that it needs people to consume made it so that it appears to be a democracy, where people think they are in control when actually they must relinquish their power in the hands of someone else who hopefully will do the right thing. To think, in 2023, that Capitalism doesn't lead to oligarchy is being voluntarily blind to history
  - sofixa 3y ago
    > Capitalism endgame is monopoly, any sufficiently old market ends in a n-opoly. Which is precisely I'm talking about regulations trying to ensure competitors have access and a chance.
retrocryptid 3y ago
This isn't exactly a "tech heavy" user community.

sofixa 3y ago

I hope the Digital Markets and Digital Services Acts from the EU will help push in the right direction towards proper competition.

rakoo 3y ago
Capitalism endgame is monopoly, any sufficiently old market ends in a n-opoly. Competition doesn't work, we've been trying that for centuries already and this is where we are. Companies' goal isn't to better people's lives, it's to widen their profit margins. What do you think will change if we add more competition that hasn't worked until today ?
- nologic01 3y ago
  At least on paper, capitalism is not synonymous with oligarchy. All these corporate entities rely for their existence and "profitability" on a legal system, a security apparatus, on vital for their operations utilities such monetary systems, educational institutions etc. etc. that are bankrolled by the collective. Corporate legal entities are merely granted a license to operate within defined sandboxes. If society and its politics refuses to design sandboxes that will serve it well we should not expect to see the benefits of the invisible hand or whatever positive attributes might be associated with the design. It is not rocket science. The first and most powerful rule which is related to this discussion is simply: don't give any toddler too big a sandbox. It gets on their head and the outcome is that the entire family suffers.
  - rakoo 3y ago
    This supposes that the sandbox (ie the State) is somehow neutral and independent, which it isn't: in all democracies, the State has always been made by the bourgeoisie, for the bourgeoisie. Only the fact that it needs people to consume made it so that it appears to be a democracy, where people think they are in control when actually they must relinquish their power in the hands of someone else who hopefully will do the right thing. To think, in 2023, that Capitalism doesn't lead to oligarchy is being voluntarily blind to history
- sofixa 3y ago
  > Capitalism endgame is monopoly, any sufficiently old market ends in a n-opoly. Which is precisely I'm talking about regulations trying to ensure competitors have access and a chance.

retrocryptid 3y ago

This isn't exactly a "tech heavy" user community.