@OpenTech_AUC If you own an iphone, you're not resisting capitalism, but immersing yourself in it. The peasants who killed their feudal lord didn't buy the fucking pitchforks: they just took them and didn't even ask for permission.
:gondola_head: 🌿 
:ignutius: 
:stargate:
@josemanuel @OpenTech_AUC
>they just took them and didn't even ask for permission.
Reminder that physical tools have different possible interactions than with digital tools, notably indirect interactions.
And people are making the mistake, are assuming, that the digital tools aren't in the control of the opponent.
This is because of notably how abstract and extremely complex computers are, and because of the possibility of remote control thanks to radio/internet.
>but immersing yourself in it.
Note that if the device were fully reverse engineered and ran fully libre software then a said dominion wouldn't be possible.
Also saner design.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIEXPLdM8rQ
>they just took them and didn't even ask for permission.
Reminder that physical tools have different possible interactions than with digital tools, notably indirect interactions.
And people are making the mistake, are assuming, that the digital tools aren't in the control of the opponent.
This is because of notably how abstract and extremely complex computers are, and because of the possibility of remote control thanks to radio/internet.
>but immersing yourself in it.
Note that if the device were fully reverse engineered and ran fully libre software then a said dominion wouldn't be possible.
Also saner design.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIEXPLdM8rQ
@mangeurdenuage @OpenTech_AUC If a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave. But if, on top of that, you have to pay for it, you're doubly so. Free software has nothing to do with this particular problem, I'm afraid.
@josemanuel @OpenTech_AUC
> If a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave
Complexity is what it is.
I had that discussion with my brother about water heating for example.
I was talking how one could combine various heatpump technology with vacuum solar heater for AC/water-heating/drying etc...
And he told me "well all that is complex" and I said, well the complexity is there either you like it or not.
If you want heat you're dependent on electricity which is either nuclear or any of the other fossil fuels and all that are their own logistic complexity and process.
You're just moving complexity from one place to other, the main difference is that in one you are directly involved and the other you aren't.
>But if, on top of that, you have to pay for it, you're doubly so
I think we disagree on that because we have different definitions.
Cost of anything is constant for everything, because at some point in time you need to maintain it.
Computing, current computing, needs high amounts of maintenance, because of bad design, some intentionally some not and some because history.
The fact that one has to pay by either, investing your time, or asking someone else to invest their time has nothing to do with slavery.
I was treated as slave labor for a large portion of my life so I have a good reference for the definition of that.
To me slavery/serfdom in the context of computing comes when you cannot own the devices. And you cannot invest yourself or someone else's time to maintain your device.
The moment one is artificially stopped from doing anything in what you do with your digital tool then that defines proprietary software/hardware. The only exception to that is the recursive rule of you are forbidden to forbid to avoid all of that being useless over time.
>Free software has nothing to do with this particular problem
:cat_stare:
> If a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave
Complexity is what it is.
I had that discussion with my brother about water heating for example.
I was talking how one could combine various heatpump technology with vacuum solar heater for AC/water-heating/drying etc...
And he told me "well all that is complex" and I said, well the complexity is there either you like it or not.
If you want heat you're dependent on electricity which is either nuclear or any of the other fossil fuels and all that are their own logistic complexity and process.
You're just moving complexity from one place to other, the main difference is that in one you are directly involved and the other you aren't.
>But if, on top of that, you have to pay for it, you're doubly so
I think we disagree on that because we have different definitions.
Cost of anything is constant for everything, because at some point in time you need to maintain it.
Computing, current computing, needs high amounts of maintenance, because of bad design, some intentionally some not and some because history.
The fact that one has to pay by either, investing your time, or asking someone else to invest their time has nothing to do with slavery.
I was treated as slave labor for a large portion of my life so I have a good reference for the definition of that.
To me slavery/serfdom in the context of computing comes when you cannot own the devices. And you cannot invest yourself or someone else's time to maintain your device.
The moment one is artificially stopped from doing anything in what you do with your digital tool then that defines proprietary software/hardware. The only exception to that is the recursive rule of you are forbidden to forbid to avoid all of that being useless over time.
>Free software has nothing to do with this particular problem
:cat_stare:
Follow
@mangeurdenuage I'm not talking about complexity. I'm talking about how certain pieces of technology are made indispensable by capitalism. Cars were made indispensable by selling them as, basically, “freedom on wheels.” The same happens with mobile phones today: you need one to operate with your bank, you need it for work, most of your life is inside it. You should be able to interact with technology on your own terms, but it's getting more and more difficult. That's what I meant by “if a significant portion of your life depends on having any piece of technology on you at all times, you're a slave.” I love technology, but I want to be able to walk away from it whenever I feel like it.
@mangeurdenuage @josemanuel You want tech that doesn't increase the GDP
@Metalglasses @josemanuel
Tech will always increase GDP as it requires more manpower to maintain but also multiplies the manpower of the users if they use it properly.
What people currently have is falsified GDP.
Especially in the tech sector. And by falsified I mean true false information to inflate gdp, not just errors. France has made the mistake to minic the USA in the 80s and now our current gdp indexes shit like drug traffic, prostitution, slavery, fake housing etc...
Again, if you want stable civilization you're required to have organic growth.
Tech will always increase GDP as it requires more manpower to maintain but also multiplies the manpower of the users if they use it properly.
What people currently have is falsified GDP.
Especially in the tech sector. And by falsified I mean true false information to inflate gdp, not just errors. France has made the mistake to minic the USA in the 80s and now our current gdp indexes shit like drug traffic, prostitution, slavery, fake housing etc...
Again, if you want stable civilization you're required to have organic growth.
@mangeurdenuage @josemanuel Cars are honestly pretty good outside of roads if you buy something that isn't made to operate solely on roads (so basically anything made before the mid 70s)
@nerthos @josemanuel I mean in terms of efficiency/per units of gas used per km.
Otherwise trains are great as long as there's one in each town like France used to have before it got abandoned progressively when cars started to ramp up and aggressively when neolibs wanted to privatize everything, except of course when they can't make more money like what happened with airports.
Otherwise trains are great as long as there's one in each town like France used to have before it got abandoned progressively when cars started to ramp up and aggressively when neolibs wanted to privatize everything, except of course when they can't make more money like what happened with airports.
@mangeurdenuage @josemanuel Trains are great for mass transport, cars are great for low scale transport. Train infrastructure maintenance needs a minimum number of people using the train to be justified.
@hakui @josemanuel @mangeurdenuage I would make a wagon exclusively for feminists and nogs so they can get to known eachother while everyone else travels in peace
@hakui @josemanuel @nerthos How many computer users are tech literate ?
Maybe the issue isn't the train but the people who let them in the country in the first place.
Maybe the issue isn't the train but the people who let them in the country in the first place.
@nerthos @josemanuel
That is correct but railway in France is, well was a public service, it was very affordable and yet they still made money even tho the cost of it, same for highways etc...
The reason of privatization of such large scale infrastructure that shouldn't be in the hand of some private entities was because it was mandate by the EU and not because it was not cost effective.
To tell you for example about the cost effectiveness of their logistics. Their computing/software works more less 3 times a week, all has to be done on paper and then done back on computer. They keep spending money on hardware that doesn't need to be changed, for example they migrated barcode scanner to tablets with qr codes, and the software new software of course doesn't even sync properly.
But this is fine according to the private galaxy brains in paris giving the orders.
And there's so much more examples.
Just at the beginning of the year, they lost a train.
They also found out they paid 500k for new engines when the invoice was 100k strangely that was never explained why.
That is correct but railway in France is, well was a public service, it was very affordable and yet they still made money even tho the cost of it, same for highways etc...
The reason of privatization of such large scale infrastructure that shouldn't be in the hand of some private entities was because it was mandate by the EU and not because it was not cost effective.
To tell you for example about the cost effectiveness of their logistics. Their computing/software works more less 3 times a week, all has to be done on paper and then done back on computer. They keep spending money on hardware that doesn't need to be changed, for example they migrated barcode scanner to tablets with qr codes, and the software new software of course doesn't even sync properly.
But this is fine according to the private galaxy brains in paris giving the orders.
And there's so much more examples.
Just at the beginning of the year, they lost a train.
They also found out they paid 500k for new engines when the invoice was 100k strangely that was never explained why.
@josemanuel @mangeurdenuage uncle ted mentioned that exact same point about cars!
@hakui @josemanuel Uncle ted isn't right about everything.
@mangeurdenuage @josemanuel yeah he got caught
@josemanuel @mangeurdenuage A car actually provides the ability to travel to places that you couldn't reasonably get to without a car.
A demon rectangle is not needed to operate a bank account - originally bank accounts worked just fine with any HTML browser or in person - but some banks have artificially sabotaged their website to only work with dr's.
Yes, many businesses have sabotaged everything so operations are only possible via dr's, despite such being 10x harder than doing such on a computer.
There is quite literally nothing of interest in a dr - my life isn't in it.
A demon rectangle is not needed to operate a bank account - originally bank accounts worked just fine with any HTML browser or in person - but some banks have artificially sabotaged their website to only work with dr's.
Yes, many businesses have sabotaged everything so operations are only possible via dr's, despite such being 10x harder than doing such on a computer.
There is quite literally nothing of interest in a dr - my life isn't in it.
> Cars were made indispensable by selling them as, basically, “freedom on wheels.”
Again our definition differs.
They are used because it's a practical means of transportation/logistics.
More practical than trains. But only as long as gas is at a price that is low enough for it to be so (and as long as there are roads).
>The same happens with mobile phones today: you need one to operate with your bank, you need it for work, most of your life is inside it.
That is entirely correct and I agree.
The main issue with computer phone bullshit is that most of of the said entities are abandoning laptop/desktops, even tho they are perfectly valid.
All the issues caused on laptop/desktop and even mobile are used to justify more restriction on mobile while the issues are created by the main people/entities who sell them (the FANGMANs).
And they have no incentive for people have a tool that actually solve their problems and that's because their economical model is not based on problem solving but on speculative value of
>I love technology, but I want to be able to walk away from it whenever I feel like it.
I agree.