From: fedora@fea.st
On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 10:42:40 -0800, dart200
wrote:
>On 1/31/26 8:36 AM, Wilson wrote:
>> On 1/30/2026 4:46 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 1/30/26 7:27 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 02:11:00 -0800, dart200
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> we finally invented a type of good that has a zero-cost to copy, and we
>>>>> still can't seem to figure out how to build a production system where
>>>>> all the products are freely distributed, cause we're so concerned about
>>>>> getting payment upfront
>>>>
>>>> So there you have it. This is why commercialism always fails.
>>>
>>> bruh i'm talking about digital goods that are zero-cost to copy
>>>
>>> real goods aren't the same,
>>>
>>> tho i might suggest we break out design vs production costs requiring
>>> that the consumer pay production price upfront ... while the design
>>> portion can be paid back as the consumer feels warranted
>>>
>>> this is moving more towards a gifting economy while dealing with the
>>> reality that production has actual sunk costs
>>>
>>> i mean in the future maybe we will have the energy availability and
>>> labor efficiency to totally transcend markets entirely, but i don't
>>> feel we're ready for such a stage
>>>
>>>> Everything must be paid for because we all must pay each other for
>>>> what others do for us with few exceptions. The system depends on us
>>>> all doing that.
>>>
>>> this especially fucks up computing. 99.99% of the industry has
>>> devolved into bullshit work that is not actually economically
>>> beneficial. but people need to get paid, and markets just don't have
>>> the capability to select for universal solutions to problems like we
>>> ought to be implementing with computing (since they rely on
>>> competition and therefor competing systems/standards)
>>>
>>> computing systems are far more like governing systems than real goods
>>> production and we haven't collectively recognized that reality yet
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The fault that devolves from that is that some of us get more pay than
>>>> others, have more status than others, live apart from us in mansions,
>>>> work apart from us in skyscrapers in corner offices, so we have no
>>>> access to, never even see those people as far as we know. These are
>>>> the people who make the decisions in society. Their separateness from
>>>> us means that they are never held accountable for bad self serving
>>>> decisions.
>>>>
>>>> When shit comes down, the blame goes to the person who enforces those
>>>> decisions, not to the decider. The enforcer is thrown under the bus,
>>>> quietly goes away, is fired or moved elsewhere. In rare cases, maybe
>>>> even get some jail time. But the decision stands.
>>>>
>>>> And the rest of us are powerless. Why can't things be different? '
>>>> 1) because those who have the power like having power, will not allow
>>>> things to be different.
>>>> 2) because the rest of us like it that way too. We are powerless, but
>>>> we are also blameless. The guy in the corner office at the top of a
>>>> skyscraper did it, not us.
>>>>
>>>> Too radical? Of course it is, because this is the way things have
>>>> always been, since humans stopped being hunter gatherers. This is how
>>>> we know how to be.
>>>>
>>>>> it's silly and entirely anti-consumer. it doesn't cost anything to
>>>>> grant
>>>>> a consumer access to the digital good, let them have the experience and
>>>>> decide after if it warrants payment for the experience. and for
>>>>> continued development by creator. this will create a better feedback
>>>>> system where people only pay for products they value after they had the
>>>>> experience, not before...
>>>>>
>>>>> will some people cheat the system??? i guess, but that already happens,
>>>>> and we end up with a worse feedback system where people have to pay
>>>>> speculatively upfront for the experience rather than paying back for an
>>>>> experience they valued enough to voluntarily pay for
>>>>>
>>>>> never mind all the DRM and platform locking bull crap that just wastes
>>>>> everyone's time with utter nonsense
>>>
>>> you know what will make the rest of us not powerless noah?
>>>
>>> > consolidating our voice by committed consensus making
>>> >
>>> > #god
>>>
>>> something the rich are wholly incapable of doing even among themselves
>>> since they've mostly been selected and filtered by late stage hyper
>>> capitalism, so tbh they're powerless to set up a competing system of
>>> consensus making. that's so far off their radar they can't even
>>> imagine it coming ??
>>>
>>
>> "Late stage capitalism"
>>
>> https://i.redd.it/6pz3jus402jc1.jpeg
>>
>
>that's because it is
>
>do u think giving the global masses a voice, the 90% of the global
>population the lives off sub $20/day, would use that voice to support
>the grossly oppressive and inequitable system of property rights as it
>stands???
What person of power would be so foolish as to give any masses any
voice?
> > ???
> >
> > #god
--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<>> to <<>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
