5 ms·

Why can't it just be a "dumb" fantasy? Why does it have to be a dumb libertarian fantasy? I don't see anything particularly libertarian about it. If anything, t

Why can't it just be a "dumb" fantasy? Why does it have to be a dumb libertarian fantasy? I don't see anything particularly libertarian about it. If anything, the existing infrastructure there is a vaguely libertarian thing, the product of their own self determination, and the Google-ish meddling is merely run of the mill capitalistic scheming. A great article otherwise though.

patrickaljord 13y ago
Libertarian bashing seems to be fashionable lately. Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians.
- ataggart 13y ago
  >Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians. A profound understatement.
- forgottenpass 13y ago
  Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians I didn't know someone had to be in government before their ideology could be considered silly. Libertarian bashing seems to be fashionable lately. Of course it is. Many of the libertarian voices I hear these days are off the rails. Some, but not all, of my politics are libertarian but in the last few years I stopped saying as much because I don't want to get lumped in with the loons. There is a lot of untenable wishful utopian thinking seen as axiomatic going around these days.
Apocryphon 13y ago
I don't think that it's particularly libertarian at the core "laissez-faire good, government coercion bad" sense. It seems like it embodies an ethos where corporations are the ones pushing innovation, while governments either stand by, or become cheerleaders for them, or are impotent archaic dinosaurs trying to impede brave private enterprise. All of which seems vaguely Objectivist. It's a far cry from the sort of close, symbiotic collaboration between government and private contractors in the defense industry, or say in the '50s and '60s during the Space Race. Why the focus on corporations? I think it's just another generalization- when we talk about libertarian innovation, it's often about Objectivist-looking titans of industry singlehandedly shaping the market and keeping the big bad taxman away, as opposed to autonomous small-scale hacker collectives, or the little guy in a private workshop. I'd just prefer to call it "cyberpunk."
Fasebook 13y ago
Oh, just using words for maximum effectiveness. The title wouldn't have carried near the political weight if the title was "don't even think about competing against established carriers in Africa, we own this bitch" or "Africa has billions of dollars in opportunities for risk-averse inverters and burgeoning oligarchs." or "Trust us, we got this telecommunication and logistics in a politically unstable atmosphere all figured out, there's NOTHING competing forms of communication could ever offer the people of Africa." See how ineffective these titles are? Isn't it much more effective to assume the identity of fiscal conservatives and deflate the funding out of a potential market before it's even born by appealing to those who make most of the economic decisions? I think it helps to consider HN not as a public forum, but as a capitalist/democratic wind vane or a PR game sandbox. Remember, you can say whatever you want here but only up-voted and approved comments will be seen by others.
coldtea 13y ago
>Why can't it just be a "dumb" fantasy? Why does it have to be a dumb libertarian fantasy? I don't see anything particularly libertarian about it. Well, other than the libertarians who thought of it, and those that support it.
- manicdee 13y ago
  Too many people are confusing "Capitalist" with "libertarian." Learn the difference, then understand that there's nothing "libertarian" about making money from avoiding a sovereign power's taxes while sabotaging their communications infrastructure.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >there's nothing "libertarian" about making money from avoiding a sovereign power's taxes while sabotaging their communications infrastructure. The "no true libertarian" defense?

patrickaljord 13y ago

Libertarian bashing seems to be fashionable lately. Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians.

ataggart 13y ago
>Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians. A profound understatement.
forgottenpass 13y ago
Which is funny because most people in power are not libertarians I didn't know someone had to be in government before their ideology could be considered silly. Libertarian bashing seems to be fashionable lately. Of course it is. Many of the libertarian voices I hear these days are off the rails. Some, but not all, of my politics are libertarian but in the last few years I stopped saying as much because I don't want to get lumped in with the loons. There is a lot of untenable wishful utopian thinking seen as axiomatic going around these days.

Apocryphon 13y ago

I don't think that it's particularly libertarian at the core "laissez-faire good, government coercion bad" sense. It seems like it embodies an ethos where corporations are the ones pushing innovation, while governments either stand by, or become cheerleaders for them, or are impotent archaic dinosaurs trying to impede brave private enterprise. All of which seems vaguely Objectivist. It's a far cry from the sort of close, symbiotic collaboration between government and private contractors in the defense industry, or say in the '50s and '60s during the Space Race. Why the focus on corporations? I think it's just another generalization- when we talk about libertarian innovation, it's often about Objectivist-looking titans of industry singlehandedly shaping the market and keeping the big bad taxman away, as opposed to autonomous small-scale hacker collectives, or the little guy in a private workshop. I'd just prefer to call it "cyberpunk."

Fasebook 13y ago

Oh, just using words for maximum effectiveness. The title wouldn't have carried near the political weight if the title was "don't even think about competing against established carriers in Africa, we own this bitch" or "Africa has billions of dollars in opportunities for risk-averse inverters and burgeoning oligarchs." or "Trust us, we got this telecommunication and logistics in a politically unstable atmosphere all figured out, there's NOTHING competing forms of communication could ever offer the people of Africa." See how ineffective these titles are? Isn't it much more effective to assume the identity of fiscal conservatives and deflate the funding out of a potential market before it's even born by appealing to those who make most of the economic decisions? I think it helps to consider HN not as a public forum, but as a capitalist/democratic wind vane or a PR game sandbox. Remember, you can say whatever you want here but only up-voted and approved comments will be seen by others.

coldtea 13y ago

>Why can't it just be a "dumb" fantasy? Why does it have to be a dumb libertarian fantasy? I don't see anything particularly libertarian about it. Well, other than the libertarians who thought of it, and those that support it.

manicdee 13y ago
Too many people are confusing "Capitalist" with "libertarian." Learn the difference, then understand that there's nothing "libertarian" about making money from avoiding a sovereign power's taxes while sabotaging their communications infrastructure.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >there's nothing "libertarian" about making money from avoiding a sovereign power's taxes while sabotaging their communications infrastructure. The "no true libertarian" defense?