4 ms·
Loved this article. > Making explicit these differences, however, would reveal that these platforms are not all that different from the banks of Wall Street: t
by louwrentius 3y ago
Loved this article.
> Making explicit these differences, however, would reveal that these platforms are not all that different from the banks of Wall Street: they are not making value, they’re taking it. And as long as this remains the underlying form of profit, tech firms’ imaginary of a technological future will be limited to the fast and cheap profits of monopoly rents. This is at the center of tech’s innovation crisis. That tech work is becoming bullshit is not the problem. The problem is that the companies themselves are bullshit.
Also please read David Graeber s Bullshit Jobs.
- staunton 3y agoSeems like there's a lot of discontent people who really enjoy it when someone starts calling everything around them bullshit. Graeber's ideas/books with respect to "bullshit" are themselves cynical bullshit written as a kind of joke for maximum controversy. I'm sure he had a lot of fun though, being invited to speak and tell people all their work is bullshit...
- drooby 3y agoGraeber's book hits a nerve with people because I think it touches upon a real problem that people are feeling: "Why am I working so much, doing so little, and getting so little in return? What's the point? Life should be more fulfilling, considering how wealthy our society is." It _feels_ like bullshit. Unfortunately, his book is essentially a long and unscientific blog post that builds upon weak arguments and arm chair philosophy. The irony is that his book seems to be an example of the problem.
- staunton 3y agoAgreed on all points. I also don't see anything that contradicts what I said, though you phrased some of it better than me. The issue is that this feeling people have isn't really related much to Graeber's objective claims.