Archive

Posts Tagged ‘tech monopolies’

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 4

June 5, 2019 4 comments

In the previous post of this series, I wrote about how the large number of aspies.. also known as programmers etc.. in the tech industry will be one of the main reason for its coming downfall. To quickly summarize, most programmers are poor at reading other people- especially as it concerns transgressing boundaries that no sane person would dare cross without expecting blowback. As a result, these mentally disabled people (just being honest here) will often make and stick to really bad decisions, you know.. the type which will get them removed from the gene pool. Euphemism aside, this is an issue that is especially relevant in the rapidly declining west due to market share of tech monopolies such as Google, FakeBook etc. See.. monopolies make the effects of stupid decisions that much worse, creating conditions for a quicker and far harsher blowback.

In that post, I also briefly mentioned SJWs- specifically, how they too lacked a theory of mind, but for far different reasons than aspies.. I mean programmers. But why is the nexus of aspies and SJWs in tech monopolies so problematic and ultimately suicidal for those corporations. It comes down to how these two groups of losers make each other mistakes that much worse. So let us talk about that dynamic. Large tech corporations seem to hire people with SJW mindsets for administrative jobs at a much higher frequency than other corporations. Part of the reason for this phenomena has to do with them being located in coastal California and heavily urbanized parts of the east coast etc. But the more important reason, in my opinion, is that tech monopolies want to present a public image of being trendy,”with it”, “woke” and morally “superior”.

It also helps that they have not suffered any serious or sustained blowback to acting like high-handed assholes.. yet. And that is likely to change, far faster than most want to believe. Many forget that just a decade ago, the state of internet (as far as it concerns tech monopolies) was quite different from what we see today. And let us be honest about something else, the public image of tech monopolies and that sector in general has taken a pretty severe beating in the past five years. There is a reason why cable shows such as ‘Silicon Valley‘ have become popular and increasingly caustic in their depictions of that sector. A decade ago, many people worshiped techies and wholeheartedly supported that sector. Today, I am willing to bet that, over 50% of americans will pay money to watch them be burned in a public square.

But why does this fast and large shift in public attitudes towards tech monoplies matter? After all, who really liked Standard Oil, Bell Telephone Company, pre-1950s Movie Studies and IBM during their heyday. In case you didn’t catch it, there is a reason I chose the names of those erstwhile monopolies and oligopolies. Is anybody today saddened by their breakup or downfall subsequent to anti-trust actions by previous governments? My point is that the public perception of any corporation, even one that is effectively a monopoly, is ultimately the single biggest determinant of its future survival. Tech monopolies have made far more enemies in past decade than many other monopolies did over multiple decades. But why and what does it have to do with SJWs?

To understand what I am getting at, let me ask you a few short questions. Which corporation will be hated more, one which charges you a bit too much for some services (any old-fashioned local bank) or one which unilaterally screws you over with no recourse (Paypal)? Which one will be hated more, an old-fashioned record label or movie studio run by greedy people belonging of a certain ethno-religious (insert name..) or corporations that fill a similar niche today but will shut you down and screw you over at the metaphorical drop of a hat because you offended some stupid piece of shit (YouTube, FakeBook)? I could list more examples, but you get the point. The later types of corporations elicit far more revulsion and hatred than the former. But why?

Well.. for two reasons. Firstly, internet monopolies do not follow due legal process or even bother to carefully justify their actions. Human beings remember slights and insults far better than “rationalist” idiots want to accept. Secondly, many less reputable corporations of yesteryear were not monopolies and one could easily find competitors eager to work with another new customer or partner. Also, as mentioned in a previous post, monoplies such as Standard Oil, Bell Telephone Company and IBM were always more than willing to sell their products and services to whoever could pay- irrespective of whether they agreed with their worldview or not. It was all about making money and getting repeat business, nothing more.

Now let us go back to SJWs or more precisely, how they will be the death of internet monopolies- in more ways than one. Ever wondered why corporations in previous eras seemed to lack SJWs, or why corporations in some sectors still have no SJWs within their ranks? It comes down to corporate structure, specifically how it has changed over past four decades. Prior to 1980, almost every person in management and administration rose to their current positions from within that corporation or from another similar one. In other words, they were loyal to the corporations they worked for and it was rewarded with job or career security. However the neoliberal “revolution” changed that and the management and administrative staff of corporation were increasingly external hires who saw each job as a temporary stepping stone towards an independent career- which never works for most of them in the end.

But what does this have to do with SJW-ism and “woke” capitalism? Well.. think of it this way, what does a person who does not expect to stay at a corporation for the rest of their life care about? The simple answer is- finding their next and hopefully better job. But what value does somebody, who likely has never worked in a corporation similar to the one in which they are seeking a job, offer to their new employer? Only two things, impressive-sounding educational “credentials” and manufactured public image. This why, for example, a mediocre candidate getting an MBA from an ivy-league school translates into a great job offer while an intelligent one from a “second rate” state university languishes in obscurity.

And this often ties in with a carefully curated public image aka people indulging in grandiose acts of “virtue” display or anything else that is seen as fashionable. It is all about showing off, lying and bullshitting. Earlier, I mentioned that SJWs lack a theory of mind, albeit for different reasons than aspies. Well.. here is the reason. SJWs are all about careerism supported by ever more ridiculous displays of fake “virtue”. If being “woke” and “tone policing” did not exist, they would support and promote anything that appeared fashionable. Heck, if enough idiots educated at ivy-leagues thought that Nazism was hip, they would go full Nazi.

In other words, being “woke” and “politically correct” is fashionable for the same reason polyester suits were fashionable in 1970s or those weird padded suits were big in 1980s. It is all about constantly giving off the appearance of being “hip”,”current” and “with it”. But surely, they cannot be that stupid? Are they so out of touch with reality? Guess what.. they are, and hanging out in their own social bubbles merely reinforces their belief system- if you can call it that. But more importantly, they have so far been insulated from the consequences of their behavior and actions. I, however, predict that it will soon change and they will increasingly have to face the wrath of people abused by them in past- for reasons that have to with probability.

In the next part of this series, I will lay out the many statistical reasons why SJWS and their corporate enablers will soon face an extremely nasty and likely violent backlash. And ya.. their doom is linked to probabilities generated via their own actions and behavior.

What do you think? Comments?

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 3

May 12, 2019 18 comments

A few months ago, I started a short series about why the conflict between right wingers and tech monopolies won’t end well. While the immediate reason for that series was the conspiracy by tech monopolies to deplatform Alex Jones, I knew that sooner or later there would be more instances of such high-handed behaviour by tech monopolies. As it happens, my allegedly pessimistic views on human beings and their pathetic institutions get validated almost every single time. Some of you might have heard that Roissy’s blog was recently banned. Apparently that particular blog was on WP, unlike self-hosted WP blogs who are constrained only by the availability of a willing DNS registrar and hosting provider. There are those, especially on the “left” who see this as some minor victory in the war against “hate speech”.. which is now basically whatever shrill SJWs do not want you to say in public. Others see it as good riddance since that blog had increasingly become full-bore racist and was frequented by even sadder racist nutcases.

Here is what I think about the whole situation and some of you won’t like to hear it. The right to free speech is about protecting the right to unpopular speech- even and especially if you do not agree with it. I am no fan of the racism, anti-semitism and nativism which increasingly filled up posts on that blog. Having said that, I support the right of Roissy to post crazy and repulsive stuff as long as it does not involve overtly illegal stuff (making specific threats towards specific people etc). In any case, people who post controversial stuff online are not making you go to their site or social media profile and read it. Some of you might think it odd that me, a non-white guy with a deep dislike for racism and other forms of bigotry and discrimination, would support the free speech rights of a blog that peddled many of those very things. Then again, I have read a bit more history than most of you to know that “public moralists” of all shades are power-hungry sociopaths who will not stop once the most objectionable people or stuff are gone.

Consider, for example, that the hilariously misnamed PATRIOT act passed after Sep 11, 2001 to combat “global terrorism” is now used almost exclusively in investigations of “drug trafficking” to target poor people of color. Or SWAT teams, first conceived to tackle rare instances of hostage taking, are now found in almost all larger police departments and usually used to murder non-violent (and usually non-white) citizens. Similarly, laws to deal with highly organised Italian mafia are now used to terrorize, murder and otherwise destroy the lives of poor and often completely innocent non-white people. You might also remember how the 1994 crime bill meant to combat fictitious urban “super-predators” ended up jailing and destroying the lives of millions of black men for “crimes” that would have been never prosecuted if they were suburban whites. My point is that all laws, rules and regulations meant to “protect” public morality, virtue and other non-tangible bullshit end up as tools of exploitation, profit and abuse for those pushing them.

It also my contention that the tech sector, especially tech monopolies are highly susceptible to behave in such a high-handed manner. Of course, the problem with behaving in such a manner is that the inevitable backlash will be especially brutal- and that previous term is not just a figure of speech. Let us first talk about why the information technology sector is unusually susceptible to high-handed and ultimately suicidal behaviour. See.. two types of persons are over-represented in information technology corporation- Aspies and SJWs. Yes, you hear that right- Aspies and SJWs. But why is that combination so problematic and ultimately suicidal? The simple and short answer is that both, Aspies and SJWs, do not posses a functional theory of mind– albeit for different reasons. Aspies, aka computer programmers aka software “engineers” are often seen as smart or intelligent people. The tragically funny part is that they are not.

The vast majority of computer programmers are closer to autistic savant artists and other autistic savants than people without such mental disabilities. While I am not denying their specific skills, a majority of people working in programming etc are what one might say.. suffering from a mild mentally disability. This is also why so many in that sector have libertarian economic leanings. I can appreciate this far better than most since I was a bit aspy as a kid but grew out if it. But most programmer and mathematically minded do not grow out it- largely because they lack the brain circuitry to appreciate what they do not possess- not unlike a child who was born blind or deaf. But why would this be a problem? After all, haven’t the founders of Google, FakeBook etc done very well- at least right now? A disability which lets you make a very nice salary in Silly Valley cannot be that bad.. right? The thing is.. keeping power is far harder than attaining it.

The next issue I am going to talk about will be obvious to most people, but may not register in the mind of tech Aspies. Have you noticed that information technology companies, out all types of corporations, treat their users and customers like shit? I am sure that most of you have come across tons of people complaining about FakeBook, Twatter, Google, Apple, Paypal etc. Did you notice the large tech monopolies missing from that list… Amazon, Netflix and to some extent Microsoft. But why is that so? The ‘so clever’ among you might say that this has something to do with you being the product for companies such as FakeBook and Google and the consumer for Amazon, Netflix and Microsoft. Others might say that this is because they can get away with it- and there is some truth to that. Let me posit a third option- connection or lack thereof to the physical world aka reality. And you will soon why I think that is the case.

Let me ask you another question- How many of you would walk into a some random bar, insult everybody you interacted with and try to start fights with them? Let us assume that you could somehow win the first few bar fights. Or consider randomly insulting people around you, for no good reason. Why won’t the vast majority of people behave in this manner, even if they could “win” the first few times. The simple, if tasteless, answer to that question is most people who are not Aspies understand real-world social dynamics. The majority of people understand that pissing off random people around yourself, for no good reason, carries a serious and rapidly increasing reputational cost. While it may not be much in the beginning, especially if you are rich, the many enmities you will make along the way will lead to your eventual downfall and demise. There is a reason that even Machiavelli advises rulers against mistreating their common subjects- lest it create fertile grounds for successful usurpers.

Even highly totalitarian, but somewhat successful, regimes such as those in the former eastern block understood that gross mistreatment of average people and frequently subjecting them to capricious power-crazy nutcases was fundamentally bad policy. This is also why the Chinese government actually cares about what its people want and think, in many cases far more so than USA. The problem with tech Aspies is that they can read history quite well but are mentally incapable of understanding it. In other words, they are unable to appreciate how their actions and behaviour make them hated and detested. As you will see in the next part of this series, this profound inability to read other people and their proximity to equally oblivious SJWs makes for a really bad combination, with potentially catastrophic results. In case you are wondering, the main reason Amazon, Netflix, Microsoft haven’t gone that far down this route has a lot to do with such behaviour having an immediate and marked negative effect on their business.

In the next part, I will write about how SJWs aka hyper-socialized sociopathic fakes and their involvement in the tech sector makes the effects of tech aspism far worse than it would have otherwise been. SJWs, academic leftists and post-modernists also lack a functional theory of mind- though for vastly different reasons than tech Aspies. As you see, the peculiar combination of tech aspism and SJWism induces way more backlash than either would have by itself.

What do you think? Comments?

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 2

August 19, 2018 5 comments

In the previous post of this series, I put forth the idea that internet monopolies are increasingly behaving like despots who are widely hated and despised, as opposed to being simply feared. In a more ideal world such monopolies would never have been allowed to form in first place or have been broken up many years ago. Oddly enough, strict regulation of some monopolies as public utilities or breaking them up via anti-trust laws was normal practice in USA from the early 1900s to almost the end of the 20th century. But that is another, and very long, story. So let us focus on why the recent attempts by establishment politicians (especially democrats) to get internet monopolies to censor online content will lead to many problems with unforeseen consequences.

As Michael Tracey has noted- the ‘unexpected’ rise and victory of Donald Trump in 2016 over that crooked woman can be seen as the event which made the kleptocratic american establishment start worrying that their long-running scam was coming to an end because of alternative sources of news on the internet. To be clear, Michael used much more restrained language in his piece, but you get the point. All of the hullabaloo by establishment types over “fake news” and “Russian interference in our sacred elections” comes down to having to eat humble pie after losing the election to a reality show clown aka Donald Trump. Some of you might remember that I wrote something similar a few months ago (link 1, link 2 and link 3).

The problem with this approach, as Michael noted in his piece, are two-fold. Firstly, establishment types begging internet monopolies to censor content makes the later create powers which did not previously exist. Secondly, giving internet monopolies tacit approval for such behavior further concentrates power into the hand of a very small number of un-elected people with zero public accountability. Matt Taibbi has also expressed similar views on the deleterious effect of content censorship as decided by tech monopolies in two recent articles (link 4, link 5).

Of course, many idiots on the LIEBral side are short-sighted and delusional enough to believe that anything is OK to #resist Trump because “he is so extreme”- in spite of the fact that his actions so far have been, with a few exceptions, in line with standard republican dogma. These idiots can’t (or don’t) want to imagine the long-term consequences of giving tech monopolies such power, nor do they want to consider what would happen if that power was turned against them- and we have not even started talking about the inevitable blowback to such policies. Then again, excess consumption of soy milk and wearing of pussy hats while marching to protest Trump’s election are not conducive to objective thinking. Trump Derangement Syndrome is real.

Some of you might have noticed that the deplatforming of Alex Jones by internet monopolies has done something which even I once thought was close to impossible. Their concerted actions have made Alex Jones into a respectable martyr for free speech! We truly live in a bizarre world when an alcoholic loudmouth like Alex Jones can become an icon for those who oppose censorship and support free speech. I cannot resist pointing out that the character played by Alex Jones (in a cameo of sorts) in the 2006 movie, A Scanner Darkly, has now become reality. In case you are wondering, he plays a street corner preacher who rants about how the government is actually behind the drug epidemic caused by Substance D, and is then disappeared off the street corner by police in front of a small crowd for exercising his right to free speech.

But coming back to the topic at hand, establishment democrats and SJWs are delusional if they believe that their attempts to shut down gun manufacturers and shops by pressuring financial institutions or getting popular nutcases like Alex Jones kicked off internet monopoly platforms won’t have very serious and long-term consequences. Firstly, such actions do not make the people they were directed against less popular or influential. We no longer live in the era of three national TV channels, two national newspapers and a population that reflexively went along with whatever bullshit the government told them.. you know, the era between mid-1940 and late 1970s. Indeed, the very fact that somebody like Trump could win the presidency in spite of universal disapproval by establishment-types as well as over 1 billion of advertising against him should make them realize that it is no longer a viable strategy.

To compound that, there has been a systemic and very obvious loss of trust in professions and institutions in USA since the start of this century, but especially since 2008. There is a very good reason that fake anti-establishmentarians such as Trump and Alex Jones have flourished within the last decade, and will in all likelihood continue to do so in near future. I mean.. who can blame the masses. They have seen their low-paying jobs become even lower-paid and more precarious, their healthcare costs shoot through the roof with no obvious improvement in outcomes, higher education become a debt trap, housing in areas that are not dying out keeps on getting more expensive and a general sense of there being no better future has set in.

And all this is occurring at the same times when ivy-league parasites are telling them that everything is just great, financialization of every sector of economy is wonderful, globalization and outsourcing is glorious and if things are not working for them- its is all their fault. To make a long story short, the establishment has managed to get a lot of diverse and often irreconcilable constituencies pissed off against them at the same time. We are witnessing some serious political realignment right now. Some of you might have noticed that more than a few positions of the ‘alt-right’ such as support for universal healthcare, basic income etc are distinctly socialist in nature. The point I am trying to make that the anti-establishment constituencies are far more numerous, diverse and hard to fit within the traditional ‘right-left’ model.

One common thread which runs through many of these anti-establishment constituencies concerns their views on corporations and monopolies. To put it bluntly, both the ‘right’ and ‘left’ among these groups do not view corporations in a positive light. Perhaps this might have something to do with them witnessing those entities screw over normal people for all of their adult lives. The point I am trying to make is that establishment democrats and LIEbral SJWs face a far more numerous and diverse collection of groups who hate their guts. In such a situation, deplatforming a nut like Alex Jones makes him a martyr and rallying point for groups who otherwise don’t care about each other.

And this brings us to why Machiavelli wrote about rulers should avoid being hated and despised. See.. the thing with being hated by despised by the general population is that it unites otherwise disparate factions who want to see your head on the end of a pike. Also, treating your populace like crap and screwing them over with arbitrary decision-making makes even the more unsavory elements who oppose you look reasonable by comparison. Perhaps most problematically, it puts those working for you in a peculiar situation, where they are screwed if they don’t follow your orders but place themselves in certain future peril if they follow through.

In the next post of this series, I will write about my thoughts on how the blowback might play out in the current socio-economic-political situation. And yes, such blowback will most likely take diverse and multiple forms.

What do you think? Comments?

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 1

August 17, 2018 13 comments

Important: Please read this post in its entirety before commenting on it. The reason why I put this notice before writing even the first line of this post will be obvious once you start reading it.

So let us begin..

As many of you know, there has been a lot of talk and claims about whether censorship of large internet platforms by tech monopolies without even the tiniest hint of due process is a good idea or not. In case you haven’t noticed, I recently wrote a couple of posts about it (link 1, link 2) and think that it is an incredibly stupid and shortsighted idea. What I did not spell out explicitly in those posts is my belief that this extreme overreach by corporations based in SJW-istan, aka the Bay Area, will result in some incredibly problematic blow-back and reactions- of the kind that will soon make LIEbral idiots, who are still cheering for corporate monopolies to deplatform even more of their ideological rivals, regret coming up with idea in the first place.

But let us first be a bit more specific about what we are talking about. Many of you might have noticed that, since the 9th of November 2016, there has been a push by establishment democrats and contingent of useful idiot activists to use corporate power to go after “those republicans whose votes gave us Trump”. For example, there has been an unusually concerted effort by establishment democrats and dying corporate media to deplatform gun manufacturers and retailers from the highly oligopolistic financial network they created. It is funny how similar this approach is to failed attempts by american establishment to maintain its terminally declining power by imposing economic sanctions on various countries- from Russia and China to DPRK.

It does not take a genius to figure out that rest of the world (especially the parts which matter) are doing quite well in spite of these sanctions, which have unintentionally exposed the rapidly shrinking power of USA. Even very small countries, such as DPRK, have shown little interest in bargaining with USA. You might have heard that they just went ahead and tested their H-Bombs and ICBMs, before even having a formal meeting with USA. Only countries filled with spineless and white-worshiping idiots (such as India) have gone along with american establishment- so far. But what does any of this have to do with the topic of this post? As you will soon see, a lot.

Moving on to something which is similar and related- we have seen establishment democrats and their cadre of useful idiots go after something called “fake news”, which to be quite blunt can be applied to any piece of news or viewpoint one does not personally agree with. I am old enough to remember how anybody who challenged the official justifications for the failed occupation of Iraq in 2003 was labelled as an idiot or traitor by the corporate media. And we all remember how that worked out, don’t we? And who can forget all the other disastrous attempts at pushing narratives such as ‘there is no housing bubble’ as late as 2007 or how dietary carbohydrates were good for you while fats was bad for you- just to give a few of the more memorable examples of what was forcefully pushed by the corporate media as gospel truth.

An even more troubling, and more recent development, have been the willingness of LIEbral idiots to encourage and cheer on internet monopolies as they deplatform people with due legal process for “hate speech” as defined by whichever petty tyrant employed at said corporation is making the decision. Personally, I support the right of people to say whatever they want- no matter how hateful and unpleasant it sounds. Some of you might also be surprised to know that I not white. So ya.. I am perfectly fine with right of others to say hateful things even if I do not agree with it. In case you are wondering, I draw the line at actual and specific threats. For example: Person A wishing for the death of Person B, from say.. cancer, might be tasteless to some- but it is not illegal nor should it be illegal. But as we saw today, even something like this is now cause for suspension of Twitter accounts.

And this is a problem. Or to be more precise, this type of behavior by internet monopolies has the potential to cause all sorts of problems, blowback and downstream consequences far beyond what they themselves can imagine. Let me explain that sentence a bit more clearly. Some you may might have read ‘The Prince’ by Machiavelli in which he famously writes that it is better to be feared than loved- if one has to make a choice between the two. Most people seem to forget the part where he says that one should avoid being despised and hated (even if one is feared) because having people hate and despise you is how you will lose power or get assassinated. But what does this have to do with the ongoing behavior of internet monopolies?

Let us talk about what Machiavelli said about the reasons which drive the populace to hate and despise their ruler. According to him, taking the property and women (property) of populace by the prince (monopoly) because he thinks that he can get away with it (hubris) will make them hate him because people do not forget material insults. He goes so far as to say that men are more likely to forgive you for killing their parents than for taking from them what they own. According to Machiavelli, a prince (monopoly) who acts in a fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute manner will elicit contempt from the populace. In other words, depriving people of their property or livelihood and acting like an undependable bitch are surefire ways of losing the goodwill and support of your subjects.

But why does a prince require the support and goodwill of his subjects? I mean, since the prince is technically an autocrat, shouldn’t he be able to get away with anything? Well.. if you have read any history, you will know that rulers who did not take care of the needs of their population were usually the last ones of their dynasty- in addition to having short and troubled reigns. But why is that so? Why is it so important to not be hated and despised by the populace? The short answer is that deep public dissatisfaction with their rulers creates a fertile ground for external invasions, internal power struggles, attempts at assassination etc. But these are just second-order problems created due to a populace hating and despising their ruler. The central problem concerns progressive and irreversible loss of institutional integrity and stability.

In the next part of this series, I will write in more detail about why the wide range of individuals and groups affected by the capricious behavior of internet monopolies pose an unusual challenge to the continued existence of these monopolies. Some of you might heard a saying about the perils of making too many enemies at once, and how the course of events subsequent to making such a decision can be highly unpredictable and even harder to control. And hopefully, you will better understand what I meant by ‘it won’t end well’ and also why I put that warning about reading it in its entirety before commenting on it.

What do you think? Comments?