On 20.05.2012 13:52, Pavol Luptak wrote:
Just few notes:
1. It's the commercialization (economical profit motivation) that
drives
technological progress and that's why these "centralized social media
monopolies" have so many features, they are so user-friendly and so
successful
for the masses
If they received similar financing, p2p and distributed applications
could also be user-friendly. However, lacking the capacity for
surveillance and control, they can't get that funding from capital.
2. If these "social media monopolies" become really bad for their
users, they
just move to diaspora / identi.ca or something else.
Now this level of "evil" is too low for the most people, so they
simply do not
care.
Those alternatives do not have the network size, nor sophistication of
the social media monopolies, and this is exactly because they have no
comparable source of financing.
Whether people "care about it," or not, the issue of systems of
surveillance and control becoming ever more ubiquitous is a social
question.
3. You have no moral right to steal money from taxpayers and use them
to
regulate business of these social media monopolies, because you think
their
users deserve a better privacy protection.
Please read some basic macroeconmics, the government does not spend
taxpayer's money.
http://www.dmytri.info/tax-payers-lament/
By the way, if you live in an apartment building, is it morally
reprehensible to ask you to contribute in some way in order to live
there?
PS: I am a big fan of opensource, openness, freedom, but also
voluntary
decisions.
So far, you have given me no reason to care what you think, to be
honest, since you are just rehashing long discredited
"anarchocapitalist" garbage.
Have you read any Benjamin Tucker?
http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker13.html
http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/an_or_cap.html
I'm a big fan of Mutualism and Individualist Anarchism.
However, the best thing about "anarchocapitalism" is that it's
completely irrelevant, and therefore not worth spending any more time
debunking than transdimensional lizard people conspiracies.
You probably wont really believe me and proceed to write a defense of
your "anarchocapitalism" which I will happily ignore. I've already done
my research, and I'm just not interested in any ideology that pretends
that we are not deeply social.
We are people, not some sort of disconnected individual exchange value
calculators. We live for each other, we die for each other, we work for
each other, and we share with and yes, we even steal from each other. We
have a right to socially determine economic outcomes. More than a right,
we have a moral imperative that's much stronger than your shallow moral
indignation over taxation. If we can't collectively decide that we want
no poverty, no economic barriers to education or health, no business
models that cause environmental catastrophe, then we can have neither
democracy nor freedom.
And yes, this means we also have a moral right to decide that we don't
want surveillance and control to be the driving requirement of our
global communications infrastructure, and to organize socially and
politically towards these ends.
--
Dmytri Kleiner
Venture Communist
_______________________________________________
liberationtech mailing list
[email protected]
Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to
"would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?"
You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in
monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator.
Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
