4 ms·

Wouldn't any system that enables funding be susceptible to influence by the rich? Why would any sort of P2P/decentralized/etc system be impervious to that?

• terminalshort 1y ago
  Because there is no "the rich." There are millions of them and they have many competing interests.
  • mr_important 1y ago
    > class war isn't the driving force of society wrong
    • terminalshort 1y ago
      In the sense that war between opposing factions of the upper class is what you mean by "class war" then you would be right.
  • sjxjxbx 1y ago
    True, but they also have a combined interest in growing their wealth that comes at the cost of leaving less pie for the rest of us. I can’t think of many (Massie maybe?) rich (no black and white definition) that are using their wealth to better their fellow citizens to their own detriment. Most of them see it as another tax to prevent keep their heads attached.
    • terminalshort 1y ago
      A combined goal (growing wealth) is much different than a combined interest because the ways they go about it are very different and in many times conflicting. Taking pie from other rich people is many times a much superior strategy to taking it from the poor. e.g. OpenAI just launched a competitor to Chrome. And talking about "growing wealth" is much too general here because that applies to everyone, not just rich or poor.
      • sjxjxbx 1y ago
        They have a shared interest in using their wealth to enrich themselves (or their true home nations) instead of their countrymen. Taking pie from other rich people is only lucrative because the wealth gap is so massive and consistently increasing. My point is rich people should be utilizing their wealth to enrich their fellow Americans (or whatever country they live in), but all the existing ones do not have this as a primary goal. They throw some pittances - just enough to keep people from revolting. The majority of us are growing wealth so we don’t die on the streets. The rich have already cleared this goal post, and instead of making it their primary goal to give back they continue to take. Those in power could use their power to prevent this but don’t. That is their shared interest. It’s why every politician in America becomes more wealthy after entering office. It’s why corruption is rampant. It’s why we have no borders and let corporations abuse workers. The system is setup (this is the shared interest) to empower a few at the top.
  • squigz 1y ago
    There is "the rich", and that they have competing interests isn't really relevant to the issue of their ability to purchase influence in media. It doesn't matter if their interest is "good" or "bad" (And also, they have some shared interests, like "staying rich", although I see you call that a "shared goal"; a distinction without a difference, it seems to me.)
• apgwoz 1y ago
  It’s less about being susceptible to influence by the rich. Nothing can truly stop that. It’s more about ensuring that platforms can’t silence dissent. You can dissent in an echo chamber but it doesn’t do any good.