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

Technofeudalism

penguin.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: Technofeudalism

#41

Post by RandomLensman »

GabeIsko wrote: post #36
RandomLensman wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because large banks don't have enormous revenue or profits while not being super reliant on the tech lords? Traditional capitalist are doing quite well, I think.

What bank do you know that doesn't rely on cloud services these days? Heck, when was the last time you even made a transaction that didn't involve a computer? I think the respect to which this worldview holds up is the definition of the "cloud capital" that Yanis has constructed, but isn't really able to make a concrete definition of. He isn't an engineer. But in a banking system, the series of transactions are liabl…

They do use them, but at times more than one cloud provider as well as their own data centers. Certainly, the top banks do not fear the large tech companies and I think similarly, it isn't that Amazon wants to pick a fight with JPMorgan. They (simply) do business with each other and banks have been using computers far longer then "big tech" has been around.

Also, depending on jurisdiction, using cloud services in banking comes with audit/certain oversight obligations (via the bank and more regulation at least being contemplated).

Btw., Europe has had some central bank(s) run settlement system (TARGET and its succesors) for a long time now.

Re: Technofeudalism

#42

Post by piva00 »

marcusverus wrote: post #38
danwee wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> literally the threat of the sword Obviously, we need to find contemporary analogies: - the other day I opened (manually) a bunch of Linkedin profiles (each in one browser tab). Apparently, Linkedin thought it was a suspicious activity and blocked my account for some time (I don't remember, but in the range of hours). Luckily me, I still got my account... but it would be hard to find jobs and keep working connection…

Being rate-limited by LinkedIn isn't a contemporary analog to being extorted by force. You're choosing to use their service. You can choose to not use it. The closest contemporary analog to being extorted by force is, of course, our relationship to our governments. One of the most interesting aspects of libertarian thought is their notion that the liberal revolution (which began in 1776 and spread to Europe in 1789)…

> Being rate-limited by LinkedIn isn't a contemporary analog to being extorted by force. You're choosing to use their service. You can choose to not use it.

If you include network effects, does everyone really have that choice?

For example, I can't choose not to use WhatsApp to keep in touch with my family and friends in Brazil. It's simply not possible because some of them won't use another messaging app, I've tried and they will simply forget it exists because no one else uses Signal there except for me. It forces me into the Meta-world because of that, I'm not really choosing it, they aren't forcing me with violence, it's shadier than that, I simply need to since they've captured so much of the marketshare.

LinkedIn isn't the same, consequences are you might miss some job offers, you will need to find workarounds for recruiters to find you, or for you to find positions, but there are other apps that are definitely on the path of "I can't choose not to participate".

Re: Technofeudalism

#43

Post by yamazakiwi »

GabeIsko wrote: post #37
yamazakiwi wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serfs work, it is not work to read blogs or watch videos.

But it is if you are viewing advertisements. That is the argument that Yanis makes in the book anyway, heavily simplified and removed of a lot of context. The point is that you can't choose what you read or watch. We still can somewhat - we can install adblock and decide what media to consume. But instead of a "capitalist" effort to simply try to to invest in better "content", you could make the case that cloud compa…

Most times you are getting something else of value in return when viewing advertisements. free services, etc

What we're doing is more capitalistic so I'm uninterested in drawing parallels with feudalism personally, I guess fan-fiction economics are not for me.

Re: Technofeudalism

#44

Post by GabeIsko »

yamazakiwi wrote: post #43
GabeIsko wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it is if you are viewing advertisements. That is the argument that Yanis makes in the book anyway, heavily simplified and removed of a lot of context. The point is that you can't choose what you read or watch. We still can somewhat - we can install adblock and decide what media to consume. But instead of a "capitalist" effort to simply try to to invest in better "content", you could make the case that cloud compa…

Most times you are getting something else of value in return when viewing advertisements. free services, etc What we're doing is more capitalistic so I'm uninterested in drawing parallels with feudalism personally, I guess fan-fiction economics are not for me.

But if this deal follows a Capitalist system, if we have greater supply of "valuable" content, than the price should go down and we should view less ads over time. Instead the opposite is happening.

That's kind of the greater goal of the book - contextualizing our interactions with cloud companies within a larger macroeconomic picture. It is a compelling enough topic to consider. I don't really think it is fair to call it fan-fiction. It could be right or wrong, but it is a book about a macroeconomic theory that seeks to explain observable behaviors.

Re: Technofeudalism

#45

Post by GabeIsko »

RandomLensman wrote: post #41
GabeIsko wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What bank do you know that doesn't rely on cloud services these days? Heck, when was the last time you even made a transaction that didn't involve a computer? I think the respect to which this worldview holds up is the definition of the "cloud capital" that Yanis has constructed, but isn't really able to make a concrete definition of. He isn't an engineer. But in a banking system, the series of transactions are liabl…

They do use them, but at times more than one cloud provider as well as their own data centers. Certainly, the top banks do not fear the large tech companies and I think similarly, it isn't that Amazon wants to pick a fight with JPMorgan. They (simply) do business with each other and banks have been using computers far longer then "big tech" has been around. Also, depending on jurisdiction, using cloud services in ban…

It's not about fearing them - it's about them not having any choice but to do business with cloud providers, and that being the case in every industry. The whole thing gets set by whatever prices a handful of companies decide to charge. You are even starting to see cloud subsume the holdout big iron that is generally used to handle large transaction volume processing. IBM is pivoting towards cloud. AWS is rolling out mainframe emulation. Etc. We accept regulations on financial industries because of how influential they are, but why not regulation on cloud companies and services which offload much of their liabilities?

I also don't really think you can point to banks as especially profitable businesses in today's environment. They are getting hammered by high interest rates. I'm not committed to this new construction of the economy, but it is interesting that SVB failed despite being the sole bank for cloud focused start ups. It points to a system where normal finance rules we have taken for granted no longer apply.

Re: Technofeudalism

#46

Post by RandomLensman »

GabeIsko wrote: post #45
RandomLensman wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do use them, but at times more than one cloud provider as well as their own data centers. Certainly, the top banks do not fear the large tech companies and I think similarly, it isn't that Amazon wants to pick a fight with JPMorgan. They (simply) do business with each other and banks have been using computers far longer then "big tech" has been around. Also, depending on jurisdiction, using cloud services in ban…

It's not about fearing them - it's about them not having any choice but to do business with cloud providers, and that being the case in every industry. The whole thing gets set by whatever prices a handful of companies decide to charge. You are even starting to see cloud subsume the holdout big iron that is generally used to handle large transaction volume processing. IBM is pivoting towards cloud. AWS is rolling out…

Banks generally love high interest rates. Look at JPM clocking in at $13B profit in Q3.

Cloud regulation is coming anyway (and as I said, it is kind of already there for some cloud uses in financial services), your idea of all cloud users being pure price takers also doesn't match my experience.

Re: Technofeudalism

#47

Post by mempko »

yamazakiwi wrote: post #13
mempko wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain how we are not cloud serfs?

Serfs work, it is not work to read blogs or watch videos.

You missed a crucial point. Meta, X, reddit and other digital spaces that have user produced content make money off that content. It certainly is work to create tweets, posts, and comments, and videos on TikTok. This is free labor that these social media systems make money off of.

Re: Technofeudalism

#48

Post by GabeIsko »

RandomLensman wrote: post #46
GabeIsko wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about fearing them - it's about them not having any choice but to do business with cloud providers, and that being the case in every industry. The whole thing gets set by whatever prices a handful of companies decide to charge. You are even starting to see cloud subsume the holdout big iron that is generally used to handle large transaction volume processing. IBM is pivoting towards cloud. AWS is rolling out…

Banks generally love high interest rates. Look at JPM clocking in at $13B profit in Q3. Cloud regulation is coming anyway (and as I said, it is kind of already there for some cloud uses in financial services), your idea of all cloud users being pure price takers also doesn't match my experience.

You are cherry picking a bit there. Take a look at [bank stocks](https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/best-bank-stock...).

The reason banks don't "like" high interest rates is it devalues the market rate all the bonds they usually hold. I guess Chase has done a good job navigating. Regardless, it isn't long term bad for banks because they are getting great rates now.

But it still goes to show that banks are ultimately beholden to Federal reserve actions, at the end of the day. Believe me, CSPs absolutely wield power when it comes to pricing. Especially in enterprise deals - those are probably more favorable honestly. But I do think we will see regulation around it. I think of CSPs as utilities.

Re: Technofeudalism

#49

Post by latency-guy2 »

bilvar wrote: post #35

So watching cat videos is somehow akin to serfdom now. I swear the over-intellectualism of the left makes them sound dumber and dumber. Why do they have to make everything so idiotically complex? Is it an occult/esoteric thing in order to signal authority to the masses?

Its the utter domination of capitalism that they truly do not realize how ridiculous they look every day. Capitalism has answered all that communists and socialists could never even fathom, and more. It used to be a caricature to portray the rich as fat men with monocles, now the world is in an obesity crisis.

Leftists are stuck in the 1800s, and the only thing they do is talk like it as well. They really have nothing else going for them. Its all a performance, we can only hope that the few that are honest would admit it.

Re: Technofeudalism

#50

Post by RandomLensman »

GabeIsko wrote: post #48
RandomLensman wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banks generally love high interest rates. Look at JPM clocking in at $13B profit in Q3. Cloud regulation is coming anyway (and as I said, it is kind of already there for some cloud uses in financial services), your idea of all cloud users being pure price takers also doesn't match my experience.

You are cherry picking a bit there. Take a look at [bank stocks]( https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/best-bank-stock... ). The reason banks don't "like" high interest rates is it devalues the market rate all the bonds they usually hold. I guess Chase has done a good job navigating. Regardless, it isn't long term bad for banks because they are getting great rates now. But it still goes to show that banks are…

I am always talking about large banks. The main business is not holding bonds, but they can suffer a transitional effect on their portfolios, that's all. Btw., Bank of America just under $8B in Q3.

You and I have a different experience regarding unidirectional pricing power, but maybe that is related to the different banks we have in mind.

Post reply on HN