this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
638 points (94.7% liked)

Technology

59495 readers
3041 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

you are attempting to align the interest of a wage slave with owner of corporation, corpo owners literally tell workers they aint shit and they are easily replacement.

think game industry crunch and fire practice... after rockstar lays off GTA6 staff, you buying the game does not help the laid off guy

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

You're conflating two separate things. I make a distinction between understanding the inherent friction of Labor and Capital along with a broad and deep awareness of the stacked playing field, and also keeping oneself employed by necessity.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

wage worker is never aligned long term with his employer... at best short term.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I make a distinction between understanding the inherent friction of Labor and Capital along with a broad and deep awareness of the stacked playing field

I don't think you did so i clarified. You essentially possited: "But ohh gee, if idiots don't buy this slop, company loses money, and developer loses the job"

See:

That's a pretty short term view though, no? Presumably if an expected revenue stream does not generate flow to supplant the initial capital outlay, said business will not be a going concern for long?

If enough people feel this way to punish the rent seeker, he has a choice to adjust his rent seeking model to appease the paying customer. If he fails to do so, that's a classic "free market" in the raw dog form, as it should too!

Your analysis entirely skips this key point, which is frankly the entire thesis for "vote with your money"

Most people aint here to get freebies for nothing, they will pay when it is proper to do so. But we will not be feeding a parasites. media and software is 100% discretionary so we have this choice here. rent and healthcare will require more rogue tactics.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think your focus is too narrow and your anger and need for someone to be punished for the awful systems that we are forced to survive within are clouding your ability to see the larger picture specific to the necessities of survival.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you sound like you're speaking from a place of privilege, and I am allowing room for the realities of this current-state existence.

As I said, conflating two separate things. It doesn't void the validity of either to acknowledge them.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org -3 points 2 weeks ago

If you punished this corpo for rent seeking, you are hurting the wagies 🤡

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)