Clearly no. Could technofeudalism exist without the governmental enforcement of private property? If private property ceases to be a relevant socio-organizational mechanism, only then will I be open to considering that the mode of production has significantly changed.
The reification of economics under capitalism creates a fairly large blind spot under which relatively small changes in how big tech operates are disproportionately perceived. If one de-reifies their conceptualization of capitalist economics, the rest of the iceberg reveals itself. When this perspective is attained, it's plainly evident that the vast majority of social relations remain the same.
Maybe not, but the amount of centralization and the amount of power wielded by a small number of people is scary. Despite Internet lowering the cost of entry consumer choice has decreased. The number of social media sites, search engines, online book stores, hotel booking sites, weather sites, etc, has all decreased in the last ten years. Even the number of porn sites (number of independent companies at least) is shrinking. A single American mega corp like Google is arguably more powerful than all African countries combined.
> Facebook is much less than what the technofeudalists make it out to be: It’s an advertising platform that wrings pennies out of users’ scrap time — attention that would otherwise go to waste, at least from the capitalist perspective. Behind all the claims about changing the world with technology is a crew of digital ragpickers.
Hmm. "Scrap time that goes to waste?" Doesn't that depend on how that time is used and the opportunity cost. That time could be a hobby, social interaction or trying something that could be super valuable. To capitalism. To the human experience.
Another common error around surveillance capitalism, is to apply the average to deprecate the harm. Statics on average screen time are pretty large
7 hours - thats the average. Some of that time might have been productive.
What does the 10% worst percent look like? How much of that is "waste?".
I confess I don't know what technofeudalism precisely is. I do think the corrosiveness of tech such as social media, phone use and surveillance capitalism in general is underestimated.
4 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 23.3 ms ] threadThe reification of economics under capitalism creates a fairly large blind spot under which relatively small changes in how big tech operates are disproportionately perceived. If one de-reifies their conceptualization of capitalist economics, the rest of the iceberg reveals itself. When this perspective is attained, it's plainly evident that the vast majority of social relations remain the same.
Hmm. "Scrap time that goes to waste?" Doesn't that depend on how that time is used and the opportunity cost. That time could be a hobby, social interaction or trying something that could be super valuable. To capitalism. To the human experience.
Another common error around surveillance capitalism, is to apply the average to deprecate the harm. Statics on average screen time are pretty large
https://explodingtopics.com/blog/screen-time-stats
7 hours - thats the average. Some of that time might have been productive.
What does the 10% worst percent look like? How much of that is "waste?".
I confess I don't know what technofeudalism precisely is. I do think the corrosiveness of tech such as social media, phone use and surveillance capitalism in general is underestimated.