this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
58 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1425 readers
271 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

this article is about how and why four of the world’s largest corporations are intentionally centralizing the internet and selling us horseshit. it’s a fun and depressing read about crypto, the metaverse, AI, and the pattern of behavior that led to all of those being pushed in spite of their utter worthlessness. here’s some pull quotes:

Web 3.0 probably won’t involve the blockchain or NFTs in any meaningful way. We all may or may not one day join the metaverse and wear clunky goggles on our faces for the rest of our lives. And it feels increasingly unlikely that our graphic designers, artists, and illustrators will suddenly change their job titles to "prompt artist” anytime soon.

I can’t stress this point enough. The reason why GAMM and all its little digirati minions on social media are pushing things like crypto, then the blockchain, and now virtual reality and artificial intelligence is because those technologies require a metric fuckton of computing power to operate. That fact may be devastating for the earth, indeed it is for our mental health, but it’s wonderful news for the four storefronts selling all the juice.

The presumptive beneficiaries of this new land of milk and honey are so drunk with speculative power that they'll promise us anything to win our hearts and minds. That anything includes magical virtual reality universes and robots with human-like intelligence. It's the same faux-passionate anything that proclaimed crypto as the savior of the marginalized. The utter bullshit anything that would have us believe that the meek shall inherit the earth, and the powerful won't do anything to stop it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] self@awful.systems 15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

it’s very bad news if so — we won’t even have the option to escape these assholes if they own all of the fabric of the network

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

actual fucking anti-monopoly enforcement cannot come goddamn soon enough

[–] self@awful.systems 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

in before some fucking asshole posts “but how can it be a monopoly when it’s 4 companies colluding to control the entire market HMMMM? do you just hate capitalism and success?”

[–] bitofhope@awful.systems 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Uhm, actually the correct term is ~~epheb~~ oligopoly.

[–] self@awful.systems 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

oh fuck you crossed the libertarian streams, now the thread’s gonna be destroyed by bears

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 10 points 2 months ago

Well, I guess I will have to welcome our new bear overlords then.

[–] V0ldek@awful.systems 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Wait but you already have this literal system for internet service in the USA, no? Isn't it literally four companies that partitioned the country into their ISP fiefdoms?

So nothing would change is what you're saying?

[–] self@awful.systems 5 points 2 months ago

we have that fucking nightmare for residential service; what I’m saying is if they own the substrate, we’ll get that same fucking nightmare everywhere else too. and as we’ve seen in the US, it’s very easy for a broken regulator to see 2-4 companies colluding and decide that’s not a monopoly and no action is needed

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 months ago

it's a shame that packet radio is so fucking slow