Of course, as long as we live under capitalism, software and hardware
companies won't be run rationally (in terms of technology and the
production of use-values). That is, the marketing experts will still
play a major role (allowing realization of exchange-value).
Under capitalism, that makes total sense: for example, I remember my
first personal computer in the early 1980s, the Osborne 1 (a CP/M
machine). The Osborne computer company -- run by engineers -- was very
successful, until they made a major marketing mistake, announcing that
they were going to be bringing out a new, better ("IBM compatible")
computer in a few months. In the meantime, people decided that they
could wait before they bought new Osbornes, causing the company severe
cash-flow problems which eventually led to the company going broke.
Even with socialism, some sort of marketing sensibility will be
needed, though it would likely be more subordinate in the hierarchy
than it is now -- and more honest.
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Peter Hollings <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joanna –
>
>
>
> You bring back fond memories that are worthy of note. Mine were from Route
> 128 companies in Massachusetts. It was before the suits and sales-driven
> culture took over. Software was a fantastic new medium for smart, creative
> people from all the disciplines to work in. Software is like an abstract
> machine freed of the limitations of the physical world. There is no friction
> or wear. Reproduction costs were infinitesimal. For information there, is no
> Newtonian Law of Conservation – it can be copied infinitely without loss.
> Diverse, interesting people were attracted by this and a free-wheeling
> culture evolved, some of which survives today in the developer community.
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 12:19 AM
> To: Progressive Economics
> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Graeber
>
>
>
> Sillicon Valley was not a single thing. I started working in the valley in
> 1983, and I'm still there.
>
> I saw the foundation of computer technology and applications being created,
> one day at a time, by mathematicians, philosophers, egyptologists,
> physicists, musicians, classical scholars, etc. Computer science degrees
> were few and far between. This is something I'll never forget -- the
> cross-pollination, the mutual respect, and the creativity of people who
> mostly liked the work they were doing and who didn't know from one day to
> another, what would work, or what they might need to come up with next.
>
> Yes of course there scams and the MBA's took over everything. But for a
> while, it was kinda fun.
>
> Joanna
>
> ________________________________
>
> the problem with Graeber is not his factual grasp of Silicon Valley history
> it is his absurd fantasy about that history. Of course the question for
> deLong is his absurd fantasy about Obama - does he think Graeber is more
> dangerous or less dangerous than a President willing to shred the federal
> securities laws (as in the new JOBS Act) to dial for dollars among the
> Valley elite?
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>
--
Jim Devine / "In science one tries to tell people, in such a way as to
be understood by everyone, something that no one ever knew before. But
in poetry, it's the exact opposite." -- Paul Dirac. Social science is
in the middle.... and usually in a muddle.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
