Live data from Hacker News

To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

truthout.org

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#31
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically, no. You don't have access to the device that contains the decrypted content. Of course, you could try to open up or bypass the DRM module (e.g., via the GPU driver during hardware accelerated decoding), but that won't work with a TPM module and signed kernel space. If you look at the security technologies introduced into consumer decides over the last decades, it all serves the dual purpose of securing…

Couldn’t you just plug a capture card into the display out?

HDCP.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#32
post #9

We have plenty of computation. A decent laptop today is a supercomputer. Terabytes of storage can be had for under $200. Locked hardware isn’t much of an issue either. Most of that either can be unlocked or there are equivalently powerful unlocked alternatives to be had. What people must seize is the network, and the network effect. Most of today’s tech empires are built on owning the hub around which everyone commun…

The sad part is that nobody really prevents us from seizing the network. It is intrinsically decentralized by design. It takes hard work to subvert this. Yet we don't do it. A sort of digital rigor mortis has descended upon the land. A comatose capitulation, complete lack of vital signs, let alone the lust for life that characterized the early period of the Web when everything seemed possible. The "network effect" is…

We can't do it until literally everyone is willing to maintain multiple platforms. There's always people who don't and you end up on a situation where either that person is Isolated or what usually happens, people bend to them because it's just easier. Facebook won the moment elders got there because grandma uses Facebook and it's just easier to interact with her there instead of trying to convince her to do something different. As long as these kind of anchors exist centralization is basically predestined

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched from Reddit to Lemmy and haven't been back more than a handful of times (and will never comment again). Turns out only a fraction of users did the same, so not sure it was an efficient protest. I'm happy about the quality of discussion in Lemmy, although it would be nice to have more niche communities. On the other hand, the enshittification of Reddit is for sure not over, so I'm happy to have left that ti…

For what it's worth, Mastodon has been a nice community for me. I haven't really found my place in the lemmyverse. Maybe that's a good thing though.

To use the Mastodon web application, please enable JavaScript. Alternatively, try one of the native apps for Mastodon for your platform.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#34
post #9

We have plenty of computation. A decent laptop today is a supercomputer. Terabytes of storage can be had for under $200. Locked hardware isn’t much of an issue either. Most of that either can be unlocked or there are equivalently powerful unlocked alternatives to be had. What people must seize is the network, and the network effect. Most of today’s tech empires are built on owning the hub around which everyone commun…

The sad part is that nobody really prevents us from seizing the network. It is intrinsically decentralized by design. It takes hard work to subvert this. Yet we don't do it. A sort of digital rigor mortis has descended upon the land. A comatose capitulation, complete lack of vital signs, let alone the lust for life that characterized the early period of the Web when everything seemed possible. The "network effect" is…

I don’t really agree about the causes. The big problem is economic. It’s a business problem not a technology problem.

The problem is that good software that ordinary people can easily use is extremely labor intensive to produce. Software is very expensive.

This means you have to have an economic model and there has to be a toll booth somewhere or an indirect way of generating revenue like ads. Centralized services make those parts easy.

Everything else can be built in a decentralized manner. Many times it’s even easier to build that way. But how do you build it if there’s no funding available and nobody pays for anything?

It can’t all be volunteer. People need to be paid. There’s nowhere near enough volunteer open source labor available to build really polished usable systems for everyone.

It’s similar to the dynamic in other areas of media. Media is usually a deflationary race to the bottom. The best media has no funding.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, Mastodon has been a nice community for me. I haven't really found my place in the lemmyverse. Maybe that's a good thing though.

To use the Mastodon web application, please enable JavaScript. Alternatively, try one of the native apps for Mastodon for your platform.

... yes, and?

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#37
post #2

Are online user revolutions a thing? I can see this happening if the future continues on a dystopian path. Maybe users would organize and threatened to leave or have a change of power structure. Our online accounts are increasingly becoming our identities to the rest of the world, which consequently gives us agency in it, and social media has evolved to literally own this part of ourselves.

A subset of users and mods attempted a bit of a revolution on Reddit recently, you'll recall.

That stunt was doomed to fail due to inconsistent messaging, goals, and total lack of solidarity.

Reddit and its ilk are already dead. Even Lemmy's content starts to repeat itself due to 'cross posts' or other allegedly community building activities.

The chief problem of these platforms is their gameability. Numbers create social 'games' and before you know it, nobody gives a shit what you're saying, they just want to say some short quip, make a number go up, and feel superior.

It comes back around to the problem of: you can't solve social problems with more technology. Social media has a huge verifiability and trust problem.

We need to do away with karma systems, because giving people power to silence each other only leads to abuse. Invitation trees as a social concept keeps people honest, at least if they don't want to piss off others who invited them or were invited by the same person.

The group on Reddit really has no backbone. They folded as soon as their Reddit accounts were threatened. Real protest would've been gaming their system with bots (the same way they do!) And manipulating the narrative en masse.

Nobody had anywhere to go except the Fediverse, and that has its own collection of issues.

Social media is just not compatible with the way people socialize. It's a glamor and attention competition, and the winner gets... likes?

But yeah, to call that half-assed protest a revolution is somewhat of an insult to activism.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#38
post #9

We have plenty of computation. A decent laptop today is a supercomputer. Terabytes of storage can be had for under $200. Locked hardware isn’t much of an issue either. Most of that either can be unlocked or there are equivalently powerful unlocked alternatives to be had. What people must seize is the network, and the network effect. Most of today’s tech empires are built on owning the hub around which everyone commun…

Largely agree with this analysis, however your claim about nvidia:

> There is no way the nVidia monopoly will last more than another two years tops.

I feel as if I've heard paraphrases of this sentiment for at least the last ~6 years. Is there a reason you think nvidia's monopoly is decreasing or will decrease? They have quite the lead in terms of market share for discrete GPUs AFAICT (https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gpu-market-healthy-and-vib...). Even if costs go down etc., there are market dynamics at play here that I'm not convinced this industry will get disrupted anytime soon. The only major competitors in innovation for this space are Apple, Intel, and AMD, with Apple being the only one with manufacturing improvements, and that's a walled garden with very low market share for desktop computing.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#39
post #9

We have plenty of computation. A decent laptop today is a supercomputer. Terabytes of storage can be had for under $200. Locked hardware isn’t much of an issue either. Most of that either can be unlocked or there are equivalently powerful unlocked alternatives to be had. What people must seize is the network, and the network effect. Most of today’s tech empires are built on owning the hub around which everyone commun…

Don't "seize". Build.

That is, there is a network out there. You're not going to seize the existing one. You're not going to take over Facebook, either by government mandate or by force of arms. You're just not.

And that's OK, because "seize" was always a morally bankrupt idea anyway.

You want a network that's the peoples' network? Great. Go build it. Go convince people to use it.

That's not as hopeless as it sounds. As the existing stuff becomes more and more horrible to use, the existing players are doing your marketing for you.

Re: To Fight Big Tech, We Must Seize the Means of Computation

#40
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sad part is that nobody really prevents us from seizing the network. It is intrinsically decentralized by design. It takes hard work to subvert this. Yet we don't do it. A sort of digital rigor mortis has descended upon the land. A comatose capitulation, complete lack of vital signs, let alone the lust for life that characterized the early period of the Web when everything seemed possible. The "network effect" is…

I don’t really agree about the causes. The big problem is economic. It’s a business problem not a technology problem. The problem is that good software that ordinary people can easily use is extremely labor intensive to produce. Software is very expensive. This means you have to have an economic model and there has to be a toll booth somewhere or an indirect way of generating revenue like ads. Centralized services ma…

> nobody pays for anything?

We pay for almost everything in tech. Part of the digital hallucination that oppresses us is to have this self-flagellating view.

Nobody gets any free hardware of any kind. Nobody gets any free network infrastructure and bandwidth of any kind. Its all paid, by purchases, monthly subscriptions etc. With real, hard earned money by people from all walks of life and economic means. Not to mention that historically people happily paid for newspapers, TV licenses and they still do for streaming.

The deceit of big tech is propagating the idea that after you have shelled for the all the above, you really don't have to pay for certain very specific pieces of software and services - oh just pay with your reduced privacy and agency (which you don't even know is important).

What is happening is that the masses can't tell they are being ripped off (and the potential risks to individuals and society) and nobody in authority does warn them either.

In such a situation it is indeed impossible to have a normal economic model to compete. Bad business models repelled good business models.

But there is just the slightest glimmer of light at the end of this dark tunnel. While you are right, the volunteer open source enthusiasts can't substitute for the absence of healthy funding they achieved something very important: they showed that alternatives are possible, they don't require trillions, they just require a society with basic decency.

Post reply on HN