91–100 of 298 posts
> "The Sovereign Individual" by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg. Lord William Rees-Mogg being the father of Jacob Rees-Mogg, of Brexit fame. Interesting how often you meet the same people if you just start digging a little.
> Interesting how often you meet the same people if you just start digging a little.
Endemic problem in UK politics, and a lot of other countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Elon Musk must be one Spoiler: He is not. But he is very good at faking it. Anytime he tries to give a serious opinion on anything related to computers: It is laughably bad and out of touch (SQL, compilers, languages, performance, etc... ). He definitively has a scientific background but definitively not "Tech" as far as computer are concerned.
I don’t see how “tech” is limited to software. While your case might be made for software, according to many accounts Musk is a strong driver on the hardware side. For instance, I’ve read the Tesla and SpaceX books by Eric Berger, which are much more focused on technical things compared to the more mainstream books. And while Musk is not in the trenches with a screwdriver, he’s not faking it either. To be honest, I’m…
On a domain side to nerdery: video games. There is zero doubt he is faking it entirely.
The streams he publishes on game like PoE or Elden Ring, have been long commented on online boards
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/1hwe0id/elo...
And honestly, I can understand it entirely.
He has a public image of "geek/need hero" that is honestly inspiring. And that benefits him a lot because it bring people to trust his decisions. He has all the interest of the world to maintain this image.
> "The Sovereign Individual" by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg. Lord William Rees-Mogg being the father of Jacob Rees-Mogg, of Brexit fame. Interesting how often you meet the same people if you just start digging a little.
[flagged]
It's just the classic of people with a whole lot of money getting what they want from the government, only boosted by the fact that for the previous decade and a half the left has legitimized political action from corporations since it benefited them, as platforms were largely left-leaning. Now the boot is finally on the other foot and panic ensues. Can't say I like it, but it has been my position from the very start…
If the Left (and the Right, for that matter) want to make durable political change, they really need coherent theory beyond who's the Bad Guy of the moment.
I'm not a big sucker for this kind of un-nuanced "us vs them" rhetoric, but I gotta admit, the title is a stroke of genius.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's my point. Any tech can (and is) used for this. There's really no point in putting word "code" there. It adds very little additional context. Only in my opinion mostly serves the other goal - to sell.
You can argue the same for the capital that goes in. It’s used for what it’s used. By itself it’s neutral.
1. How come people are able to accumulate so much capital?
2. How come people are able to use the capital to influence life of other people in all ways possible to their liking?
are more interesting and worth asking.
Yes code and capital are both "tools". But you can't just write some code and install cameras at every corner. You need some political influence to do so. And capital buys you this influence.
I'm not a big sucker for this kind of un-nuanced "us vs them" rhetoric, but I gotta admit, the title is a stroke of genius.
It's cute but are there any actual nerds left in big tech leadership? Of the magnificent seven we basically only have Jensen Huang left as a technical leader and maybe you can count Zuckerberg.
Wozniak is still alive and seemingly not in the rightwing set, although also too retired to count as "leadership".