Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

[vt]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...er-barons.html

[lektrode]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...er-barons.html
....
............
As numerous scholars including Robert Gordon have pointed out, the new social-media based technologies have had little positive impact on economic productivity, now growing at far lower rates than during past industrial booms, including the 1990s internet revolution.

Much of the problem, notes MIT Technology Review editor David Rotman, is that most information investment no longer serves primarily the basic industries that still drive most of the economy, providing a wide array of jobs for middle- and working-class Americans. This slowdown in productivity, notes Chad Syverson, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, has decreased gross domestic product by $2.7 trillion in 2015—about $8,400 for every American. “If you think Silicon Valley is going to fuel growing prosperity, you are likely to be disappointed,” suggests Rotman.



One reason may be the nature of “social media,” which is largely a replacement for technology that already exists, or in many cases, is simply a diversion, even a source of time-wasting addiction for many. Having millions of millennials spend endless hours on Facebook is no more valuable than binging on television shows, except that TV actually employs people.

Tech firms had once been prodigious employers of American workers. But now, many depend on either workers abroad of imported under H-1B visa program. These are essentially indentured servants whom they can hire for cheap and prevent from switching jobs


...........
....
...so far, the oligarchs have played a brilliant double game. They have bought off the progressives with contributions and by endorsing their social liberal and environmental agenda. As for the establishment right, they are too accustomed to genuflecting at mammon to push back against anyone with a 10-digit net worth. This has left much of the opposition at the extremes of right and left, greatly weakening it.

Yet over time grassroots Americans may lose their childish awe of the tech establishment. They could recognize that, without some restrictions, they are signing away control of their culture, politics, and economic prospects to the empowered “tools.” They might understand that technology itself is no panacea; it is either a tool to be used to benefit society, increase opportunity, and expand human freedom, or

it is nothing more than a new means of oppression.

EXACTLY!

i used to think all the tech stuff was making life better (faster, cheaper, efficient etc)

but now?
NOTHING could convince me the 'new economy' is anything but the BIGGEST FRAUD EVER PERPETRATED.

that is, next to the current occupant, his/their entire agenda since 2008, along with his heir-apparent

one BIG FAT FESTURING PUSTULE OF CORRUPTION, INEPTITUDE AND FRAUD
the entire lot of them.

the 'french revolution' is looming larger and larger in present day amerika

heil hitlery!!

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...er-barons.html

I reckon the sooner the messianic narrative around the likes of Elon Musk is destroyed the better.

Down here we call it the "tall poppy syndrome".

By no means do I wish to see an entrepreneur who puts his money, reputation, and limited lifetime on the line fail.

But it's like tech-biz populism.......I don't see how it can end well when so many are so quick to put folks on a pedestal.....and those placed on the pedestal are so quick to speak so far outside of their core competency/success.

Hubris has as low a marginal cost per unit as so many tech products/services.....so hubris is being replicated at an exponential rate.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

EXACTLY!

i used to think all the tech stuff was making life better (faster, cheaper, efficient etc)

but now?
NOTHING could convince me the 'new economy' is anything but the BIGGEST FRAUD EVER PERPETRATED.

Reminds me of reggie. I never did quite grasp exactly what he was on about. But then again I never quite fully grokked all that Mandelbrot stuff either.

To me, the motivation seems simple: use tech as an excuse to violate labor laws, local ordinances, roll back labor standards like overtime and workweeks and minimum wage, and even employee status, find ways to leverage millions of people's capital to make you billions in the process--create a new monopoly with you as the middle man controlling the sole brand identity and acting like a new tollbooth in the flow of goods and services via re-routing systems operations through new software. That middle part is very important. No longer can customer pay the worker then the worker pays the owner. The customer must always pay the owner directly now--and the owner decides what, if any, cut goes back to the worker. Even the tip. You need total control over the capital at all times. In fact, if you can hold onto it for a month, you can probably gamble around with the float, which is half the fun.

That's the big difference between uber and taxis. One obeys the law, the other violates it. One seeks to destroy labor law and re-write, the other seeks to obey it. One seeks to employ business capital to provide a service, the other seeks to employ workers' personal capital to shift the depreciation costs. One lets employees touch the money and earn tips, the other doesn't. One has set rates, the other is sky's-the-limit.

But all their stuff works that way. It's just reconfiguring the system somehow.

Facebook is just a new newspaper with less useful information and better targeted advertising. And just like a newspaper, the readers' eyes are the product and the advertisers are the customers and any money you ever get from membership or readership is meaningless and incidental. People can just make up their own stories or re-post crap or whatever. The content is not the point. Never was. The habit is the point, just like it was with the paper. How many eyeballs you got to sell? What's the maximum you can sell them for? How many experiments can we perform on them? Don't worry. Tinder's worse.

And I get all this stuff, right? I mean, it makes perfect sense. The goal is simple. Take everything you can from average jane and joe. Take all their money. Take all their time. Take all their rights. Take all their habits. Take every last bit you can and convert it to wealth for yourself.

That's easy.

That's just "More for me and less for everyone else!"

I get that.

Makes sense.

Hell, even in a positive sum game, you can have a single winner and a whole bunch of losers. Just play Monopoly sometime to see what I mean...

But some of that social control stuff is a bit harder to wrap one's head around. At least for me. Others here seem to be more deeply versed in it.

I know few agree, but the whole thing still feels like a paper moon to me. Like any day we're gonna wake up like it's 1999 and realize that barkbox is the new pets.com and the whole thing is a sham and almost none of even the unicorns have posted a single quarter's profit in a generation and all their stocks will tumble and fall.

But as long as people keep believing and clapping, Tinkerbell can live forever.

And Keynes was right about the market and how long that sucker can stay irrational...

[touchring]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

the new social-media based technologies have had little positive impact on economic productivity

I had a Facebook account which I never use. Recently, I started using Linkedin and it was fun receiving "like" news and articles from business associates. As I see it, social media is basically cheap entertainment, it is cheaper than going to the movies or a real date. It is not a necessity, it can be blocked and life still goes on - just like China blocks Youtube, Facebook and Gmail. It can be easily replicated as China has their own versions of Youtube, Facebook and Gmail.

[Techdread]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

As I see it, social media is basically cheap entertainment, it is cheaper than going to the movies or a real date. It is not a necessity, it can be blocked and life still goes on

We are using social media now.

The new technologies have ushered in ways of working and networking that can't be measured by ol tools.
They are transforming society much faster then any of us can fanthom.
Example who uses bank branches anymore?
Want to have instantaneous chat with a work colleague or aging relative.
When was the last time you got lost, or missed someone.

It does not matter that 80% of the use is for dross its the 20% that always drives the economy.

[santafe2]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

That's the big difference between uber and taxis. One obeys the law, the other violates it. One seeks to destroy labor law and re-write, the other seeks to obey it. One seeks to employ business capital to provide a service, the other seeks to employ workers' personal capital to shift the depreciation costs. One lets employees touch the money and earn tips, the other doesn't. One has set rates, the other is sky's-the-limit.

It's more complex. If the taxi system worked well for most people, Uber would not have gotten off the ground. When I travel for work and the airport is small, I can walk outside the airport and meet an Uber driver. Cost to the hotel $15. Same for the return and they can drop me at the airport on the return. $30 total plus tip, (I've never met an Uber driver that won't take a tip). This cuts out the most expensive option, car rental and the too expensive, and annoying on the return, option, taxi.

Facebook is just a new newspaper with less useful information and better targeted advertising. And just like a newspaper, the readers' eyes are the product and the advertisers are the customers and any money you ever get from membership or readership is meaningless and incidental. People can just make up their own stories or re-post crap or whatever. The content is not the point. Never was. The habit is the point, just like it was with the paper. How many eyeballs you got to sell? What's the maximum you can sell them for? How many experiments can we perform on them? Don't worry. Tinder's worse.

Don't you think Facebook is more like an old public gathering place? The only information I get from Facebook is what my friends are doing / posting, especially friends who no longer live locally. Maybe I see the corollary because I live in a small town where we still go to our public plaza, listen to music, catch up with friends and grab an occasional meal out. Facebook is not a news organization, they just repackage the news for their customers...I mean their products.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

It's more complex. If the taxi system worked well for most people, Uber would not have gotten off the ground. When I travel for work and the airport is small, I can walk outside the airport and meet an Uber driver. Cost to the hotel $15. Same for the return and they can drop me at the airport on the return. $30 total plus tip, (I've never met an Uber driver that won't take a tip). This cuts out the most expensive option, car rental and the too expensive, and annoying on the return, option, taxi.

I guess being in a more populated corridor gives me a different view of it. I've never had a hard time finding a taxi when I needed one around here. And I always knew the rates. I've met more than one sucker who got burned by Uber's surge pricing and ended up paying $300 for a 7 mile ride. They've mostly sworn off the service now. Between that and the fact they break the law every day, I'm always rooting for them to get their cummupance. Besides, it affects city people very badly. The Taxi services and their regulations were woven into the fabric of the place. If they go under, there are no wheelchair accessible Ubers. Taxi companies have to keep those around. There are no elderly rates. Taxi companies have to keep those around too. If they put the cabs under, a lot of vulnerable old and disabled people in cities who rely on Taxis are going to be screwed.

Don't you think Facebook is more like an old public gathering place? The only information I get from Facebook is what my friends are doing / posting, especially friends who no longer live locally. Maybe I see the corollary because I live in a small town where we still go to our public plaza, listen to music, catch up with friends and grab an occasional meal out. Facebook is not a news organization, they just repackage the news for their customers...I mean their products.

Nah. Maybe it's just how I use it. I too live in a small town with a thriving downtown. It's a cool little community. We kept out all the big boxes. The old local small businesses survived because of it. Same old hardware store for 100 years, etc. etc. New things pop up too. It's a nice spot. But I don't use facebook for that. Mostly what I see it used for is newspaper services: Announcing events / weddings / concerts / obituaries / whatever, discussing sports, tv/entertainment, news and politics, advertising shoes and credit cards and cable TV service, always with a big "travel" section of cool places to go, and its own 'nostalgia' section for old pictures of old crap and 'remember when's.' And then a lot of Dear Abby motivation and whining. The occasional comic strip or game or puzzle.

I mean, I just popped it up again to make sure, it certainly feels like they've hit every one of the sections of the newspaper in my feed to me. They even call the front page your "News Feed."

You're 100% right that they're not a news organization. But the reporters were always a tangential part of the newspaper business anyways. I mean, I don't know about your local paper in Santa Fe, but mine is basically truncated Times and AP articles. Maybe one or two stories from a local reporter that matter. Mostly it's just regurgitated crap off the wire services. And facebook gives you that if you just look in the little "trending" or "suggested" boxes. "Trending" is like "breaking news!" And "suggestions" is like "here are some news stories based on your age/friends/race/location/whatever that might interest you.

Right now the top 'trending' stories are a kidnapping in Puerto Vallarta, the Old Farmer's Almanac is publishing predictions for 2017, Dick Van Dyke caught sining at a Dennys for some reason, Man detained at gunpoint in Williams, Arizona, Rudy Giuliani claims 9/11 didn't happen, etc. etc.

Now, that's just "Top Trends."

There are other buttons for Politics, Science and Technology, Sports, and Entertainment. You can click any headline to get more. More and more kids get their news this way. And that's how Facebook becomes the new newspaper.

It's off to the top right of the screen on your News Feed. Here, look at what I mean:

[dcarrigg]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

We are using social media now.

The new technologies have ushered in ways of working and networking that can't be measured by ol tools.
They are transforming society much faster then any of us can fanthom.
Example who uses bank branches anymore?
Want to have instantaneous chat with a work colleague or aging relative.
When was the last time you got lost, or missed someone.

It does not matter that 80% of the use is for dross its the 20% that always drives the economy.

It's funny. I'm the curmudgeon that still uses bank branches. I calculated up all of the debit/ATM fees that I paid in a year one year and just said, "not worth it," tore up the debit card, and that was the end of it. Checks are free. My checking account is free so long as I don't go broke. Using the branches is free. Stopping in once a week is better than getting nickled and dimed, imo.

Then again, I also get lost on occasions because I like to take random turns and see where things go. I've never used a GPS in a car, although I have looked at maps before hand. Doing it the other way sort of turns a journey into a destination, you know?

The chat stuff is certainly useful. It can get annoying, e.g. always on with e-mail 24/7/365, but I can't say I haven't gotten suckered into playing that game. I definitely have.

Still, if it's a weekend, phone is off.

Not sure if things are better or worse. But I just know I have to take a little effort to consciously decide how much or little I'm going to use any given gizmo, because it's way, WAY too easy to mindlessly just start using all of it and end up blowing thousands per year and potentially way more in opportunity costs because you went hog wild with it all. I see most people doing it around me all the time. Neighbors all have the newest iphone plus their kids plus the iphone they have from work--I saw them all out on the kitchen table then other day, about $3,600 in phones all financed over two years through calling plans, probably costing $6,000 alone before a single call or text message or bit of data gets sent. Half of them have cracked screens that nobody has the money to fix, even though the money is there to have 1.5 phones per person, at the most expensive model possible.

But the thing is, this isn't even a little bit weird. It's totally normal. My crappy $48 phone and $18 per month unlimited no contract plan is the weird one. People comment on it. Oh well. It makes calls. It'll look something up if necessary. It can be a flashlight or a compass or an FM radio or play mp3s. Just like it's $600 big brothers. Maybe it's a bit slower on the uptake, and way smaller, and the screen's harder to see. But not by much...

[seobook]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

I know few agree, but the whole thing still feels like a paper moon to me. Like any day we're gonna wake up like it's 1999 and realize that barkbox is the new pets.com and the whole thing is a sham and almost none of even the unicorns have posted a single quarter's profit in a generation and all their stocks will tumble and fall.

But as long as people keep believing and clapping, Tinkerbell can live forever.

And Keynes was right about the market and how long that sucker can stay irrational...

I don't know. I mean, new means of production & enhanced productivity have made the economy permanently improved. After all, China will lead the way:

"one roboadvisory support staff can service more than 10K clients" ... "Unlike developed markets where regulations were instituted prior to technologies being invented, Chinese regulators are relatively young and are evolving with fintech. They do not need to re-write existing regulations, an arduous task." ... “China is formalizing this harmonious relationship between banks and fintech players by creating a tiered regulatory regime…China is increasingly at the forefront of regulatory developments within fintech, signaling a dramatic change in the origin of where regulatory standards may emerge from.”

It also seems people in this thread are taking a narrow view of the social media phenomena.

Think broader.

What if you created a period tracker app for your cell phone and then turned it into a social network?

Should be good for about a quarter billion in funding.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organizat...et-you#/entity

And, sure, Yahoo! may have sold their core business for about $5 billion, but a new(ish) stealth(ish) search engine which is also engaged in heavy iron was recently valued at above $35 billion, at least until trading was halted
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ation-concerns

I think the media needs to do a better job of understanding the modern venture-funded tech CEO, maybe (s)he is simply misunderstood or just wants to drop an album? if the media is fake, why can't (s)he be?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...uctive-founder

"when he hooked a potential customer, the CEO would berate staff for being outsold by a fake person ... employees from recently acquired companies gathered in the top-floor office to meet their new CEO, unexpectedly turned out to be an album release party"

[wayiwalk]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

I use the local paper to keep informed of local stuff, events, kids/school sports stories, school board meetings, and town news that relates to budgets, code enforcement, crime, etc. You could not find this information online other than to go to the local paper's website.

Our local paper covered zoning application and variance applications from three different local religious organizations in the last ~ eight years. In each case, the town denied the applications for what were sound reasons (variance requestss do not have to be approved). The local paper did an excellent, detailed job of covering the facts driving the case for each organization's application.

The most recent one made it to the regional news. The regional news completely ignored many key facts in the case.

That's what you get when news becomes stories that are trending, rather than real, objective, local coverage. The town is presently being sued in federal court, with the likelihood of the court ruling on the plaintiff's behalf despite the facts. I'm sure we'll be trending again soon!

[vt]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

The DNC, Media, Big Tech alliance have a new counter revolutionary to challenge them:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/...llary-clinton/

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

$30 total plus tip, (I've never met an Uber driver that won't take a tip)

I have a feeling you made this up.

Uber drivers don't get tips Santafe.

And any time I have offered to give cash as a tip, they refuse.

[santafe2]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

I have a feeling you made this up.

Uber drivers don't get tips Santafe.

And any time I have offered to give cash as a tip, they refuse.

It might be our age difference PoZ. I don't offer a tip, I give it with a thank you and a compliment and I mean it. I've never had an Uber driver not respect my need to tip them. I get that they are not paid enough. You should try offering a tip with respect and a compliment, it will work. We've disagreed on a few issues on iTulip but I've never accused you of being a liar. I expect the same from you.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Tech Oligarchs Worse Than Robber Barons?

It might be our age difference PoZ. I don't offer a tip, I give it with a thank you and a compliment and I mean it. I've never had an Uber driver not respect my need to tip them. I get that they are not paid enough. You should try offering a tip with respect and a compliment, it will work. We've disagreed on a few issues on iTulip but I've never accused you of being a liar. I expect the same from you.

I think this might just be a new thing and a matter of location, SantaFe/PoZ...

Uber actively discouraged tips, and has allegedly fired drivers for taking them (there are ongoing lawsuits about this in several states) before they lost the lawsuit a last May.

Since then, their tipping policy is a bit looser, but it's accepting tips is still strongly discouraged in major urban areas.

Here's an HBR article on it.