• tinsukE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 month ago

    Love how it highlights that big tech (much to capitalism’s fault, TBH) can only drive innovation if the tech has a moat around it, if no one else can, or would, copy it and deploy it at a lower cost.

    Which is… the argument that people use to defend capitalism? That capitalism drives innovation and makes it accessible to everyone at the lowest possible price.

    I like the frugal tech idea as much as I like degrowth.

    • eldebryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s basically saying that “big tech” (as we know it today) and competition-friendly capitalism just cannot coexist. Which I’m inclined to agree with.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Frugal tech idea and degrowth are more capitalist than a handful of monopolies owning you in every orifice and billing you for it.

      If by “capitalism” we don’t mean paleo-industrialism of XIX-century aristocrats with monocles and child labor. If we do mean the “free market with protections for property, rights, safety and anti-monopoly regulations yadda-yadda” moderate-normal-classical model.

  • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is a pretty good article. Something I try to stress to my students. Technology is a major driver of culture and society, and understanding that complexity of relationships is important. It’s not developed in an isolated bubble, nor is any technology neutral or value-free.

    I like that the article highlights community engagement. That is so very true. Otherwise some good-intended deployment can quickly become technological colonialism when the users might not be able to do system upkeep or it solves the wrong problem