4 ms·
> We need people at the gate to keep the fools from doing as they please. Interesting that you take the agile problem-solving examples and the overall thesis o
by MrVandemar 2y ago
> We need people at the gate to keep the fools from doing as they please.
Interesting that you take the agile problem-solving examples and the overall thesis of the book (not website) and extrapolate to a single catastrophic genocidal concept that apparently only these gatekeepers can prevent.
The truth is that the people at the gate are actually pretty keen on staying the people at the gate. They'll raise whatever bogeymen they can to keep that status quo, and call people fools and stupid and nihilistic.
To take an example of the permissionless culture, Napster really didn't hurt anyone, but did upset a lot of the entrenched asymmetric power structures in the music industry, and was clearly a crucial development leading to iTunes, Bandcamp, Spotify, and probably Tor as well.
> The problems this web site is describing are all of the same stripe: regulatory capture by lobbying groups. That's what needs to be fixed.
You've identified a problem.
Have you made any personal attempt, any material investment, in fixing that problem?
Would you stand in the way of others who would fix that problem, even if it was against the current rules or laws of a culture, society or group?
- slowmovintarget 2y ago> Have you made any personal attempt, any material investment, in fixing that problem? Yes. I voted, and I'm teaching my child how to be a net positive for society.
- dzhi 2y agoI find that statement entertaining.
- MrVandemar 2y ago> Yes. I voted, and I'm teaching my child how to be a net positive for society. You voted for a politician, and you're teaching your child. Neither of these people — the politician, the child — are you. It sounds rather dangerously like you're saying you've done nothing except abnegate any responsibility for these problems yourself and expect others to shoulder the burden for you.
- jmpz 2y ago> To take an example of the permissionless culture, Napster really didn't hurt anyone, but did upset a lot of the entrenched asymmetric power structures in the music industry.. This is demonstrably false. Napster and it's ilk did hurt people. It did not focus it's upset only on the 'entrenched asymmetric power structures in the music industry,' it also affected small business and independent musicians, arguable more so, since they weren't as well funded to adapt to the disruption. In terms of the 'crucial development leading to iTunes.. Spotify,' how have these not become the newly entrenched asymmetric power structures? Bandcamp is a notable exception, and I don't think Napster in anyway contributed to it's development, except for the fact that it might have been a way to distribute your own music. But that wasn't it's primary use.
- MrVandemar 2y ago> it also affected small business and independent musicians, arguable more so, since they weren't as well funded to adapt to the disruption. By "independent musicians" I assume you mean Lars Ulrich.
- jmpz 2y agoNope. Lars Ulrich got a lot of hate for his stance against piracy, since Metallica were unlikely to suffer much from it. But, I think his perspective came from the time they spent as an independent band where they would not have survived without record sales.
- mikewarot 2y ago>Napster and it's ilk did hurt people. How? When Napster showed up, I started BUYING MUSIC on CDs at a prodigious rate, because I was discovering all these new artists I would have never heard on the radio. The same was reflected across the industry. It was a boom time for the music industry, and lifted all boats. It's the reaction to Napster that killed things, once they started suing customers, and equated us to thieves on the high seas, I haven't bought a CD since, neither have many others.
- jmpz 2y ago