From: fedora@fea.st
On Sun, 1 Feb 2026 11:17:49 -0800, Dude wrote:
>On 1/31/2026 12:07 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 14:53:21 -0500, Wilson
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/31/2026 2:37 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 13:32:42 -0500, Wilson
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/31/2026 12:25 PM, Dude wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/31/2026 8:47 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:36:16 -0500, 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "No offense but," offense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The old deny what I am about to say before I say it trick.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> So, I told them both to invest their money, if they have any, in
>>>>>> precious metals for economic stability and as a hedge against US dollar
>>>>>> inflation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The economic situation is clear:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The U.S. government ran a budget deficit of $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2025
>>>>>> (ended Sept. 30), which sent the national debt to a record high of $38.5
>>>>>> trillion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Throughout history, governments have opted to increase money supply to
>>>>>> devalue their domestic currencies in order to make challenging fiscal
>>>>>> deficits easier to manage. This time probably won't be any different,
>>>>>> which is why gold soared by a whopping 64% last year.
>>>>>>
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
