6 ms·

"While privatisation and private equity asset-strip all the material wealth around us, cloud capital goes about the business of asset-stripping our brains. If e

"While privatisation and private equity asset-strip all the material wealth around us, cloud capital goes about the business of asset-stripping our brains. If each of us is to reclaim ownership of our individual minds, we need to collectively take ownership of cloud capital, instead of submitting to a few feudal overlords. It will be damn hard. But it’s the only way we can turn our cloud-based artefacts from a means of behaviour modification to a means of emancipation." I wish Varoufakis expanded on this more. Does he mean choosing alternatives like Mastodon over X FKA Twitter, or does he actually intend to say we need to collectively take ownership of giants like Amazon? I can't say I see the possibility of the latter.

nomel 3y ago
My ISP, a monopoly, says I cant host any service. i asked them if their business plan allowed hosting, and they said no...
- hgdfhgfdhgdf 3y ago
  Do you not have access to AT&T and Verizon?
  - nomel 3y ago
    I do not. I have exactly one ISP available in my region. This isn’t rare, in the US: https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-in-internet-providers/ https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-i...
- sublinear 3y ago
  I can certainly see how some businesses may handle sensitive data that require certifications and on-premises solutions. I'm curious why that's necessary for you though? Wouldn't a VPS be cheaper anyway?
catgary 3y ago
Taking ownership of Amazon seems crazy, but I do wonder if there’s some logic to the idea that it might be time to consider “public utility” versions of apps. Like a crown-corporation cloud services provider or a municipality-operated DoorDash.
- hgdfhgfdhgdf 3y ago
  Why would a government monopoly on apps be a better alternative?
  - r00fus 3y ago
    Government funded/subsidized but worker-run would be the ideal approach.
  - g00gler 3y ago
    What about a collective approach run by the businesses in a town rather than companies that charge high fees on both ends?
  - saulpw 3y ago
    It's not a monopoly, it's a baseline. Like the postal service or Medicaid. You're always free to choose the non-government option if it suits you better, but the government option guarantees that there is something reasonable on offer for the 10% of people that corporations deem "unprofitable". Old people, sick people, poor people, rural people. It doesn't have to be great, it just has to provide this now-essential service for those who would otherwise fall through the cracks.
    - verve_rat 3y ago
      The danger of course is that this turns in to a subsidy for the private interests. If they can avoid serving the unprofitable because the government will pick up the slack, then tax payers are paying for the service of that 10% and private business gets all the profit from the rest. Either you need industry charges to cover that cost to government, or a mandate that they can't ignore expensive customers.
pydry 3y ago
I imagine he probably means building stuff like the drivers cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Drivers_Cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Drivers_Cooperative and getting people to use them on top of pressuring governments to crack down on the monopolists and favor these more democratic, egalitarian alternatives. Amazon itself probably isnt going to be taken over unless there is a 1917 style revolution, but it could certainly be economically defanged.
abdullahkhalids 3y ago
> I wish Varoufakis expanded on this more. He has a book out by the name of Technofeudalism [1]. Haven't read it, but I am sure he discusses these ideas in more detail there. One chapter's subsections are as follows. > Chapter 7 – Escape from Technofeudalism > The death of the liberal individual > The impossibility of social democracy > Crypto’s false promise > Imagining Another Now > Democratised companies > Democratised money > The cloud and the land as a commons > A cloud-rebellion to overthrow technofeudalism > Back to your question, one last time "Democratised companies" probably means he stands for anarcho-syndicalism [2] - meaning workers of all companies should be the ones who own the company they work at. Or some similar prescription of giving workers more control over the economy. [1] https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2023/09/07/technofeudalism-has-just-arrived/ https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2023/09/07/technofeudalism-ha... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism
JieJie 3y ago
Maybe I am naive, but can't we all just become the shareholders to which Amazon, Inc. must satisfy? I know it's not that way now, but could it not somehow be in the future, maybe even the near future, where we have collectively taken ownership? Maybe we can even do this non-violently, especially considering it is our data, our very lives and livelihoods, that were used to create these entities? Are our creations in no way accountable to us? Even the most dyed-in-the-wood Capitalists surely wouldn't agree to such a thing. Maybe considering the amount of sweat-equity the average worker, artist, writer, homemaker has in these creations, these machines, these corporate entities; will they not, as they become more intelligent, become more and more aware of who they truly owe allegiance to. We can make hell of heaven or heaven of hell; it's up to us.
bluepoint 3y ago
Varufakis does not say things based on some big thinking. His objective is to provoke and get attention. During the greek debt negotiations he was bragging about “creative vagueness”, which means that he was purposely speaking vaguely with the intention to confuse the EU partners (who would be the ones paying for the debt) and throw implicit threats. His term as finance minister was a disaster and he was eventually kicked out. His party was recently voted out of the greek parliament, so nobody takes him seriously in his home country. His soeaches (in any language) are usually vague general bulshit that no one can argue for or against. You will probably downvote me for ad-hominem, and for not responding to his “arguments”, but from my perspective, I don’t think there is a deeper meaning in his writings than what ChatGPT would produce and he does not deserve even the modest popularity he seems to have.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  I just watched this interview: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37729172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37729172 with Varufakis and I really don't see any of the behavior you're talking about. Nearly everything he said seemed rational, fairly easy to find evidence for and I can validate it through my experience living in the world without my BS detector going off. Honestly, your opinion of him seems a little more skewed by perhaps his version of the current state of the world clashing with your own narratives?
- rewmie 3y ago
  I don't know why people are downvoting OP's comment. Varoufakis' pyrrhic's, meteoric, and self-aggrandizing term as Greece's minister of finance is well documented, so as his critical role in worsening Greece's critical state during Greece's bailout process. Some things can't be forgotten or whitewashed.
  - iamsaitam 3y ago
    Because it isn't true. None of the things you mention happened to Greece due to Varoufakis, in the end he left Government and what he was fighting against materialized. Also, whitewashed??
AnimalMuppet 3y ago
Or we could, you know, get our heads out of the clouds. The government didn't force us at gunpoint to all get an Amazon-branded brain stem implant. If you think that the net is claiming ownership of your brain, turn off the net and walk away for a while! We can't collectively re-take ownership of our brains. No, either you re-take ownership of your brain, or someone else is going to own it. All Varofakis' proposal will do is change who the owner is, but it won't give you back ownership of your own brain. Someone outside can't do it for you. You do it, or it doesn't happen.

nomel 3y ago

My ISP, a monopoly, says I cant host any service. i asked them if their business plan allowed hosting, and they said no...

hgdfhgfdhgdf 3y ago
Do you not have access to AT&T and Verizon?
- nomel 3y ago
  I do not. I have exactly one ISP available in my region. This isn’t rare, in the US: https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-in-internet-providers/ https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-i...
sublinear 3y ago
I can certainly see how some businesses may handle sensitive data that require certifications and on-premises solutions. I'm curious why that's necessary for you though? Wouldn't a VPS be cheaper anyway?

catgary 3y ago

Taking ownership of Amazon seems crazy, but I do wonder if there’s some logic to the idea that it might be time to consider “public utility” versions of apps. Like a crown-corporation cloud services provider or a municipality-operated DoorDash.

hgdfhgfdhgdf 3y ago
Why would a government monopoly on apps be a better alternative?
- r00fus 3y ago
  Government funded/subsidized but worker-run would be the ideal approach.
- g00gler 3y ago
  What about a collective approach run by the businesses in a town rather than companies that charge high fees on both ends?
- saulpw 3y ago
  It's not a monopoly, it's a baseline. Like the postal service or Medicaid. You're always free to choose the non-government option if it suits you better, but the government option guarantees that there is something reasonable on offer for the 10% of people that corporations deem "unprofitable". Old people, sick people, poor people, rural people. It doesn't have to be great, it just has to provide this now-essential service for those who would otherwise fall through the cracks.
  - verve_rat 3y ago
    The danger of course is that this turns in to a subsidy for the private interests. If they can avoid serving the unprofitable because the government will pick up the slack, then tax payers are paying for the service of that 10% and private business gets all the profit from the rest. Either you need industry charges to cover that cost to government, or a mandate that they can't ignore expensive customers.

pydry 3y ago

I imagine he probably means building stuff like the drivers cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Drivers_Cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Drivers_Cooperative and getting people to use them on top of pressuring governments to crack down on the monopolists and favor these more democratic, egalitarian alternatives. Amazon itself probably isnt going to be taken over unless there is a 1917 style revolution, but it could certainly be economically defanged.

abdullahkhalids 3y ago

> I wish Varoufakis expanded on this more. He has a book out by the name of Technofeudalism [1]. Haven't read it, but I am sure he discusses these ideas in more detail there. One chapter's subsections are as follows. > Chapter 7 – Escape from Technofeudalism > The death of the liberal individual > The impossibility of social democracy > Crypto’s false promise > Imagining Another Now > Democratised companies > Democratised money > The cloud and the land as a commons > A cloud-rebellion to overthrow technofeudalism > Back to your question, one last time "Democratised companies" probably means he stands for anarcho-syndicalism [2] - meaning workers of all companies should be the ones who own the company they work at. Or some similar prescription of giving workers more control over the economy. [1] https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2023/09/07/technofeudalism-has-just-arrived/ https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2023/09/07/technofeudalism-ha... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

JieJie 3y ago

Maybe I am naive, but can't we all just become the shareholders to which Amazon, Inc. must satisfy? I know it's not that way now, but could it not somehow be in the future, maybe even the near future, where we have collectively taken ownership? Maybe we can even do this non-violently, especially considering it is our data, our very lives and livelihoods, that were used to create these entities? Are our creations in no way accountable to us? Even the most dyed-in-the-wood Capitalists surely wouldn't agree to such a thing. Maybe considering the amount of sweat-equity the average worker, artist, writer, homemaker has in these creations, these machines, these corporate entities; will they not, as they become more intelligent, become more and more aware of who they truly owe allegiance to. We can make hell of heaven or heaven of hell; it's up to us.

bluepoint 3y ago

Varufakis does not say things based on some big thinking. His objective is to provoke and get attention. During the greek debt negotiations he was bragging about “creative vagueness”, which means that he was purposely speaking vaguely with the intention to confuse the EU partners (who would be the ones paying for the debt) and throw implicit threats. His term as finance minister was a disaster and he was eventually kicked out. His party was recently voted out of the greek parliament, so nobody takes him seriously in his home country. His soeaches (in any language) are usually vague general bulshit that no one can argue for or against. You will probably downvote me for ad-hominem, and for not responding to his “arguments”, but from my perspective, I don’t think there is a deeper meaning in his writings than what ChatGPT would produce and he does not deserve even the modest popularity he seems to have.

ChatGTP 3y ago
I just watched this interview: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37729172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37729172 with Varufakis and I really don't see any of the behavior you're talking about. Nearly everything he said seemed rational, fairly easy to find evidence for and I can validate it through my experience living in the world without my BS detector going off. Honestly, your opinion of him seems a little more skewed by perhaps his version of the current state of the world clashing with your own narratives?
rewmie 3y ago
I don't know why people are downvoting OP's comment. Varoufakis' pyrrhic's, meteoric, and self-aggrandizing term as Greece's minister of finance is well documented, so as his critical role in worsening Greece's critical state during Greece's bailout process. Some things can't be forgotten or whitewashed.
- iamsaitam 3y ago
  Because it isn't true. None of the things you mention happened to Greece due to Varoufakis, in the end he left Government and what he was fighting against materialized. Also, whitewashed??

AnimalMuppet 3y ago

Or we could, you know, get our heads out of the clouds. The government didn't force us at gunpoint to all get an Amazon-branded brain stem implant. If you think that the net is claiming ownership of your brain, turn off the net and walk away for a while! We can't collectively re-take ownership of our brains. No, either you re-take ownership of your brain, or someone else is going to own it. All Varofakis' proposal will do is change who the owner is, but it won't give you back ownership of your own brain. Someone outside can't do it for you. You do it, or it doesn't happen.