Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

ar.al

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 102 posts

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#21

Post by clavalle »

rdtsc wrote: post #11

I made a few tangential points regard globalization in a similar discussion. Basically wondering how globalization which was a very right wing corporatist idea (Sanders calls it a Koch brothers proposal here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0 basically) became a favorite of the new left. And conversely anti-globalization was a top issue for the left along with TPP, NAFTA and other such stuff. I think it is r…

I see globalization less as an agenda and more of an inevitability as we become more and more connected.

The best thing we can do is make sure that whatever power structures we guide into place during that process serve the largest coalition possible.

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#22

Post by k-mcgrady »

sandworm101 wrote: post #10

Am i the only one here that doesnt use facebook? I think i logged in once eight or so years ago. My clients dont use it. My friends do ... well did . But it was never an issue. My students avoid it due to the "creep factor". I still live life via email and telephone and that isnt unussual. Even my tech clients, some in downtown SF, expect email to be the norm. So when I see zuck going on about revolutions I have to w…

1.8 billion DAU's. They must be getting something out of it. You're definitely in the minority (even on HN, but I'm sure there are a sizeable number of people here not using it). I think every B2B scenario would expect tel/email. I have never encountered any that asked me to interact over Facebook and I'd be shocked if they did. Is it possible your view of Facebook is skewed by not using it in the last 8 years? A lot of people I know seem to be using it more and more for everyday tasks, for example:

1. Address book, messaging (FB & Whatsapp)

2. News

3. Buying/selling through a newish marketplace feature

4. Event organisation (events & groups)

5. Promoting business and communicating with customers (B2C and vice versa through enabling messenger feature for a page)

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#23

Post by billiam »

When will the Bond villains that run the largest tech companies realize that they can't own the Internet? Zuckerberg, your algorithms turned half my relatives into crazy Trump supporters that don't talk to the other half, is that your idea of bringing families together?

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#24

Post by Oxitendwe »

devoply wrote: post #14
rdtsc wrote: post #11

I made a few tangential points regard globalization in a similar discussion. Basically wondering how globalization which was a very right wing corporatist idea (Sanders calls it a Koch brothers proposal here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0 basically) became a favorite of the new left. And conversely anti-globalization was a top issue for the left along with TPP, NAFTA and other such stuff. I think it is r…

Think of the poor and how much they have been helped by the globalization of the world is how they were won over. See how many people we've lifted out of poverty because of globalization.

That's not really something people typically argue against when criticizing globalization - the issue is that these people are often helped at the expense of citizens of other countries that pursue a globalist agenda, and that people believe their government has a duty to protect the interests of its citizens above all others.

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#25

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Tharkun wrote: post #16
zekkius wrote: post #3

I appreciate Aral's general issues with Facebook. Privacy rights in the digital age are issues we face not just with SV, but with every corporation we interact with. I appreciate the EU's interest in this sphere and I worry the rights of US citizens will be co-opted by corporate lobbying, not to mention other parts of the world.

The EU's interest in this sphere is bizarre to say the least. It's very much a fan of surveillance. It pays lipservice to privacy, while actively engaging in dragnet surveillance.

The EU believes in people's privacy from corporations, and even from foreign (non-EU) governments. Just not from themselves.

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#26

Post by sandworm101 »

Tharkun wrote: post #13
sandworm101 wrote: post #10

Am i the only one here that doesnt use facebook? I think i logged in once eight or so years ago. My clients dont use it. My friends do ... well did . But it was never an issue. My students avoid it due to the "creep factor". I still live life via email and telephone and that isnt unussual. Even my tech clients, some in downtown SF, expect email to be the norm. So when I see zuck going on about revolutions I have to w…

> Does he really think a large and growing percentage of the planet uses his website? Yes. Because it's true. Facebook has more than a BILLION active users. Let that sink in for a minute.

So, even accepting that (i dont) the vast magority of the planet do not use facebook. How many use telephones? How many use email?

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#27

Post by floathub »

Tharkun wrote: post #13
sandworm101 wrote: post #10

Am i the only one here that doesnt use facebook? I think i logged in once eight or so years ago. My clients dont use it. My friends do ... well did . But it was never an issue. My students avoid it due to the "creep factor". I still live life via email and telephone and that isnt unussual. Even my tech clients, some in downtown SF, expect email to be the norm. So when I see zuck going on about revolutions I have to w…

> Does he really think a large and growing percentage of the planet uses his website? Yes. Because it's true. Facebook has more than a BILLION active users. Let that sink in for a minute.

But do they? Do they really? I once setup a facebook account for a company (I have never had a personal account). They send that account an e-mail every day (and an SMS). Every day. If I had the e-mail account set to actually load images in the text of the e-mail, would they count those logged hits as an "active user". I suspect (albeit with no actual concrete evidence) that their "user" numbers are significantly over stated via mechanisms such as this.

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#28

Post by supernumerary »

I like this idea of technical organs, that are enmeshed with notions of self-hood.

Another person who has been talking in this way is the philosopher Bernard Steigler, he uses this term 'general organology' in an attempt to rehabilitate our technological entanglements from the skeptical cul-de-sac demonstrated by the OP and supported by most recent philosophy (e.g. Adorno, Debord, although crucially not Walter Benjamin)

Although I am sure he would be equally vitriolic about FB the general overview of Steigler's thought here is a neat compliment to the POV of the OP.

http://nootechnics.org/general-organology-the-co-individuati...

I have corrupted this angle a little bit and tried to treat Facebook with kid gloves here:

https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-object.htm...

Re: Encouraging individual sovereignty and a healthy commons

#30

Post by Ygg2 »

hourislate wrote: post #15
MrZongle2 wrote: post #2

FTA: "Where Mark asks you to trust him to be a benevolent king, I say let us build a world without kings." I'd also submit that even if you trust Zuckerberg to be a benevolent king, he won't be king forever. He may grow bored of Facebook and move on, have an untimely accident or a poor diagnosis...these are all events that can put all things Facebook in the hands of somebody far less (presumably) benevolent. Imagine…

All those you listed are Saints compared to Mark who is one of the most dangerous men in the world. facebook needs to be torn down. It is a toxic apparatus, being used against the population. Just saying.

I think you are overreacting.

Mark is just the last incarnation of people that scratched the social itch. If Facebook failed, we'd still have G+ or MySpace. At this point, he seems like an inevitability.

Post reply on HN