Re: [SPAM] Re: tensions within the bay area elites
Glad to see Google getting it's due but I'm wondering if the deeper significance and risk posed by Google isn't being a wee bit overlooked here... In a blogpost I did about a year ago, I was pointing to Google's victory in an anti-trust action which was being interpreted as a victory for "free speech"; and arguing that the more significant risk was likely to come from Google's impact on "Freedom of thought" as in "Google's algorithms have to be understood at the level of "epistemology" i.e. from the perspective of their role (in fact, intervention) in framing our underlying "knowledge, understanding, justified belief about the nature of the world"." http://tinyurl.com/aokqzsl Now that Google's halo is a wee bit dented some deeper reflection on what Google might, through its search algorithms, be doing to our underlying frameworks of knowledge--either inadvertently by structuring them in pursuit of its commercial goals or purposefully by, for example, following the direction of its friends in the US State Department--might be in order; and perhaps even more usefully some thought on what might be done about this. M -Original Message- From: nettime-l-boun...@mail.kein.org [mailto:nettime-l-boun...@mail.kein.org] On Behalf Of Florian Cramer Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 9:38 PM To: nettim...@kein.org Subject: [SPAM] Re: tensions within the bay area elites On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Hans de Zwart wrote: > Just look at the graph displaying Google's DC lobbying investment and > you will instantly realise that Google is not the same Google that it > was a decade ago. To chime in here: If Facebook qualifies as "scary", then Google does even more so. Lately, the company has been aggressively ventured into military-industrial territory with its recent investments into robotics, artificial intelligence, augmented reality and drone technology. <...> !DSPAM:2676,53718551308591646260386! # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
There is also tension within Google, that is interesting to observe. I have a friend working in Google.org, the humanitarian arm that works on projects like apps to help find missing persons after some type of disaster. he and others there are often extremely frustrated by what goes on over at google.com, not only because they might disagree on ethical or political grounds, but also because Google and quite a few of the big tech joints play at being counter culture, but often have the effect of making countercultural events and locales too expensive for the people who started them/built them. Even so, many people here, while disliking Google for some things, also recognize that some of the tech giants are making real efforts on environmental issues, and some of them are trying to at least consider how they affect local communities. But sometimes it's hard to disentangle corporate policy from personal behavior by employees (whether it's positive or negative). On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Hans de Zwart wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Hey Geert, > > The tension between the Bay area elites is less interesting than the > grassroots unrest from the 'data-havenots' who are slowly starting to > feel uncomfortable with the level of governance/jurisdiction that Google > is having in their lives: <...> -- Kim De Vries http://kdevries.net/blog/ # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Hans de Zwart wrote: > Just look at the graph displaying Google's DC lobbying investment and > you will instantly realise that Google is not the same Google that it > was a decade ago. To chime in here: If Facebook qualifies as "scary", then Google does even more so. Lately, the company has been aggressively ventured into military-industrial territory with its recent investments into robotics, artificial intelligence, augmented reality and drone technology. On top of that, or rather: in sync with it, its top management believes in technological "Singularity" (about which Wikipedia remarks that the "flashback character in Ken MacLeod's 1998 novel The Cassini Division dismissively refers to the singularity as 'the Rapture for nerds'). Ray Kurzweil, chief "Singularity" evangelist, has been working as Google's director of engineering since 2012. Google is co-founder and main sponsor of his "Singularity University" ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/business/13sing.html?pagewanted=all : "For those who haven't noticed, the Valley's most-celebrated company - Google - works daily on building a giant brain that harnesses the thinking power of humans in order to surpass the thinking power of humans. Larry Page, Google's other co-founder, helped set up Singularity University in 2008, and the company has supported it with more than $250,000 in donations. Some of Google's earliest employees are, thanks to personal donations of $100,000 each, among the university's 'founding circle.'"). Google's most recent projects straightforwardly follow the "Singularity" script. Most of them are bundled under "Google [x]", "a semi-secret facility run by Google dedicated to making major technological advancements" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_X). Examples: - Through quick and aggressive company acquisitions, Google has become one of the main players in contemporary robotics. The company has put Andy Rubin, architect and former chief developer of the Android operating system, in charge of its robotics program. Its most recent and most spectacular acquisition has been Boston Dynamics, a company at the cutting edge of military robotics and notorious for products like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNZPRsrwumQ (The Guardian has more information on that acquisition: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/17/google-boston-dynamics-robots-atlas-bigdog-cheetah) - Linked to its robotics research is Google's project to develop driverless cars. The company is beyond the prototyping stage and currently runs test-drives of autonomous cars throughout the U.S.. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car) - Google has also begun to invest into drone technology and bought up the drone manufacturer Titan Aerospace: http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/14/technology/innovation/google-titan-drone/ . Google strongly competes with Facebook in this area. - Google's acquisition of 'smart meter' company Nest ( http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/google-buys-smart-meter-start-up-nest/) and development of a "Google Contact Lens" equipped with wireless chips ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Contact_Lens) are further indications that the company is leaving behind its search engine roots. On the likely upside: All this sounds as if the company, with the billions it can burn on experimental projects and its attempt to find new areas of business, is going through some retro- or neo-1990s cyber phase. It's quite possible that these efforts will eventually fall flat on their face. Public resistance against Google Glass, even in a tech-friendly country like the U.S., and the protest actions against Google employees in San Francisco seem to indicate changing times. -F # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
Brian, nettime, Brian, you have said this so succinctly...the Bay Area as epicenter of this technologicalized spread of an apparently securely spreading monoculture, the globalization of management and work in which a giant like Google or Twitter or Facebook defines what that is and how much it costs and how many can use it and who the players are going to be; as if we all were players. I agree with Jaron Lanier, that everyone working on FB should be paid. We are, after all, sources. One lens to see this through, in terms of Google's"pervasive" power, is the adoption of Google by huge sections of the municipal public sector, presumably because there is no equal alternative. No questions asked, The San Francisco Unified School District - a direct indoctrination of 50,000 children grades K- 12 to forms of work structured through use of Google now uses Google as its online educational platform. They bought secured space so that email addresses of kids are not accessible, intranets per each school, but all on google platform. Yet, this was the default position - Google because there was no alternative. Google because many of the tools are accessible and easy to use. Our children, their ideas of education, the intermingling of market research with education, are all intertwined in this massive widespread municipal acceptance of Google's authority and product. The controversial Google buses are a visible sign of the times. Literally, urban planning may be more conditioned by where Google picks up its workers in the morning, and where, then, the Google workforce would buy condos close to transport, than by any other kinds of concerns. And if Google already has convinced the public schools, and is transforming real estate, and may be putting wi fi into the parks, then why not just change the name of our city to Google CA? We could be incorporated all the way down the peninsula. It's as if the bus represents a frame into which the city is being stuffed; a frame, which is much larger and clearly more in tune with the "future" of all things, than the one in which residents now living here (but possibly soon to be evicted) have a stake. The very ground plane of the city of San Francisco is being altered as if it were a Google Map, by Google itself and with a tacit nod from city hall. Maybe we all just need to own stock to have a say in city government? Google's answer to complaints is to pay for free transportation on city buses for young people - the Free Muni Pass for Youth program. They have just signed on to do this for the next 2 years. How can anyone criticize that? That's good for families and young people, but again its a micro lens. The same poor kids for whom this project was originally designed, by an activist from Coalition for the Homeless, are being forced to leave SF in droves due to rising costs. How far will Google's bandaid attempts to make good in SF go? Their offer to put free wi fi in all the parks, so the "utopian" dream of seamless connectivity, need not be disrupted is similar. They wanted to supply all the wifi ten years ago. And someone needs to pay for this service. I look around and see the white cords of ipod headphones inserted into ears, the more I think of that iPod advertising campaign that was so creepy at the turn of the 21st c. ---where silhouettes were dancing and all that was white was the headphone and ipod. and they were everywhere. The idea of the "everywhere" that we are everywhere and everywhere is us...the all seeing eye of Google...the all pervasive use of this one tool, all in one...and you are one and i am one, and our identities are now privatized because against the backdrop of monoculturalism, anything else seems a wierd anachronism; a throwback to what is happening 'now'. I'm afraid its corporate imagination running away with the bacon once gain, and don't get me started on Bill Gates and Windows 8 and the take over of higher education! molly Molly Hankwitz On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Brian Holmes wrote: > On 05/12/2014 04:47 AM, d.garcia wrote: > > Which company is currently in the spotlight and today's designated Dr. >> Evil is less important than the legitimate hostility and generalised >> anger at the winner takes all economy of info capitalism that these >> companies collectively represent. > > This is the key point. Google represents the new managerialists because > it's the most visible and also, the most hypocritical (Burning Man, fun, > and all that). But what's impressive is how the Bay Area has become the > single most important point of production for the software that organizes > work and daily life for users of devices around the globe. US and > especially Californian discourse is so apolitical that most of these new > managerialists probably don't even realize the degree of direct algorithmic > control they exert, nor the standardizing influence which their ethos, > values, economic profiles and lifestyles is having on national and regi
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Oh yeah... It's probably just a persons problem.. probably related to ego and such... What could be wrong with the not-do-evil Google? - - the fact that they bent to entertainment industry and were the first to accept privatized, automated policing/sanctioning scheme on their platforms, thus opening the door to industry requesting private censorship everywhere? - - their acceptance of paid-peering deals with major telcos operators, opening the door to these priority deals breaching Net neutrality? - - real name policy and repeated attacks of E.Schmidt against anonymity (so ironical when you know how secretive is the guy and the decision-making process at the top of G)? - - change of their licence to explictly merge all data into a single profile (which they said a few years before they would never do?) - - the fact that they became a US military contractant by acquiring killer robots with Boston Dynamics? - - their cooperation with the State department? - - their transformation of users into proprietary drones through the use of locked-down implants (glasses)? - - Their investments in strategic portfolios in the domains of biotech and transportation? - - Their active cooperation with PRISM and other programs of the NSA? No really, I don't see why Google bypassing the fundamental right to a fair trial, implementing automated private censorship, attacking anonymity, participating in massive breaches of privacy, leading the trend of anti-net neutrality deals, turning users into drones, and expanding to strategic fields while acquiring killer robots would be a problem to anyone. j On Sunday 11 May 2014 01:57 PM, Geert Lovink wrote: > Dear nettimers, > > I know, there are tons of examples of this. I just want to know > more what you think of it, in particular if you happen to live > there, or come from the Bay Area. > > To me, it is somehow super clear that Facebook is evil. Not hard to > understand. But Google? Why are tensions rising so high lately > around them? Look at the tone of the Cory Doctorow blog post to > Boing Boing… Don't get me wrong. But have they really gone down > lately? In my humble view they are as evil as were a decade ago... > What happened? Have we changed? > > Yours, Geert > > -- > > Eric Schmidt, war crimes apologist and colossal hypocrite > > Cory Doctorow at 6:00 pm Wed, May 7, 2014 > > Just a reminder that Google CEO Eric Schmidt is a colossal > hypocrite and an apologist for war crimes: > > “Some people will cheer for the end of control that connectivity > and data-rich environments engender. They are the people who > believe that data wants to be free and that greater transparency in > all things will bring about a more just, safe and free world. For a > time, WikiLeaks' cofounder Julian Assange was the world's most > visible ambassador for this cause, but supporters of WikiLeaks and > the values it champions come in all stripes, including right-wing > libertarians, far-left liberals and apolitical technology > enthusiasts, While they don't always agree on tactics, to them, > data permanence is a failsafe for society. Despite some of the > known negative consequences of this movements (threats to > individual security, ruined reputations and diplomatic chaos), some > free-information activists believe the absence of a delete button > ultimately strengthens humanity's progress toward greater equality, > productivity and self-determination. We believe, however, that this > is a dangerous model, especially given that there is always going > to be someone with bad judgment who releases information that will > get people killed. This is why governments have systems and > valuable regulations in place that, while imperfect, should > continue to govern who gets to make the decision about what is > classified and what is not.” > > - Google CEO Eric Schmidt, on whistleblowers, from "The New Digital > Age," written with Jared Cohen, another Googler. > > This is the man who said, "If you have something that you don't > want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first > place" (but flipped out when Cnet performed the most perfunctory of > doxxings on him), but whose position, when it comes to leaks > detailing everything from the indiscriminate killing of civilians > to criminal mass-surveillance of whole nations (and massive > cyberattacks on his own company) is that grownups know what they're > doing and it's not up to the "far left," and "right wing > libertarians" to publish the truth and hold powerful criminals to > account. > > In short: if Google outs you through a "Real Names" policy on G+, > maybe you just shouldn't be gay, or maybe you shouldn't be hiding > that fact from your violent and intolerant neighbors. But if a > whistleblower or a reporter outs an elected official for gross > corruption and war crimes, she's an irresponsible child who's taken > the law into her own hands and sh
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hey Geert, The tension between the Bay area elites is less interesting than the grassroots unrest from the 'data-havenots' who are slowly starting to feel uncomfortable with the level of governance/jurisdiction that Google is having in their lives: https://kevinroseisaterribleperson.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/home-demo-at-google-vcs-house-on-potrero-hill-sf/ http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/20/5231758/protesters-target-silicon-valley-shuttles-smash-google-bus-window We are seeing the very early signs of what I am sure will soon be a much more widespread discomfort with Google's practices. Cory is just more attuned than most to these weak signals (and so are you probably, hence your question). I've spoken about some of these issues at the recent "Security in Times of Surveillance" conference in Eindhoven. Video of my talk is here: http://www.win.tue.nl/eipsi/surveillance/zwart.mp4 Just look at the graph displaying Google's DC lobbying investment and you will instantly realise that Google is not the same Google that it was a decade ago. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-google-is-transforming-power-and-politicsgoogle-once-disdainful-of-lobbying-now-a-master-of-washington-influence/2014/04/12/51648b92-b4d3-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html Cheers, Hans On 11-05-14 15:57, Geert Lovink wrote: > Dear nettimers, > > I know, there are tons of examples of this. I just want to know > more what you think of it, in particular if you happen to live > there, or come from the Bay Area. > > To me, it is somehow super clear that Facebook is evil. Not hard > to understand. But Google? Why are tensions rising so high lately > around them? Look at the tone of the Cory Doctorow blog post to > Boing Boing… Don't get me wrong. But have they really gone down > lately? In my humble view they are as evil as were a decade ago... > What happened? Have we changed? > > Yours, Geert > > -- > > Eric Schmidt, war crimes apologist and colossal hypocrite > > Cory Doctorow at 6:00 pm Wed, May 7, 2014 > > Just a reminder that Google CEO Eric Schmidt is a colossal > hypocrite and an apologist for war crimes: > > “Some people will cheer for the end of control that connectivity > and data-rich environments engender. They are the people who > believe that data wants to be free and that greater transparency in > all things will bring about a more just, safe and free world. For a > time, WikiLeaks' cofounder Julian Assange was the world's most > visible ambassador for this cause, but supporters of WikiLeaks and > the values it champions come in all stripes, including right-wing > libertarians, far-left liberals and apolitical technology > enthusiasts, While they don't always agree on tactics, to them, > data permanence is a failsafe for society. Despite some of the > known negative consequences of this movements (threats to > individual security, ruined reputations and diplomatic chaos), some > free-information activists believe the absence of a delete button > ultimately strengthens humanity's progress toward greater equality, > productivity and self-determination. We believe, however, that this > is a dangerous model, especially given that there is always going > to be someone with bad judgment who releases information that will > get people killed. This is why governments have systems and > valuable regulations in place that, while imperfect, should > continue to govern who gets to make the decision about what is > classified and what is not.” > > - Google CEO Eric Schmidt, on whistleblowers, from "The New > Digital Age," written with Jared Cohen, another Googler. > > This is the man who said, "If you have something that you don't > want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first > place" (but flipped out when Cnet performed the most perfunctory of > doxxings on him), but whose position, when it comes to leaks > detailing everything from the indiscriminate killing of civilians > to criminal mass-surveillance of whole nations (and massive > cyberattacks on his own company) is that grownups know what they're > doing and it's not up to the "far left," and "right wing > libertarians" to publish the truth and hold powerful criminals to > account. > > In short: if Google outs you through a "Real Names" policy on G+, > maybe you just shouldn't be gay, or maybe you shouldn't be hiding > that fact from your violent and intolerant neighbors. But if a > whistleblower or a reporter outs an elected official for gross > corruption and war crimes, she's an irresponsible child who's > taken the law into her own hands and should know better. > > > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # > collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # > more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # > archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > - -- Hans de Zwa
releasing Jaro Mail :^) 2.0
dear nettimers, I'm posting this console software release here knowing that many people reading this list are old-school email aficionados (if not usenet or even more ancient stuff) hence this aptly named software might be of use for some. It is what I use myself for the task since several years now, nicely packaged and documented (check the PDF manual, if you really want to give it a try is necessary). Its saving me *a lot* of time checking emails thanks to whitelisting and its great at facilitating use of personal email setups to avoid GOOG and others - postfix+dovecot2 on a VPS and there you go, for the joy of you and your friends! Among the new features of this 2.0 release is the possibility to easily send out anonymous emails via the Mixmaster network by just changing the "From:" field in Mutt. Annunciazio'! annunciazio'! Mari'! Mari'! Dyne.org Free Software Foundry proudly releases: oooo dP 88 dP .db. 88d888b. .db. 88d8b.d8b. .db. dP 88 88 88' `88 88' `88 88' `88 88'`88'`88 88' `88 88 88 88 88. .88 88 88. .88 88 88 88 88. .88 88 88 88 `8P8 dP `8P' dP dP dP `8P8 dP dP 88~o odPyour humble and faithful electronic postman *A commandline tool to easily and privately handle your e-mail* Version: **2.0** Website: http://dyne.org/software/jaro-mail # INTRODUCTION JaroMail is an integrated suite of interoperable tools for GNU/Linux and Apple/OSX to manage e-mail communication in a private and efficient way, without relying too much on on-line services, in fact encouraging users to store e-mail locally. Rather than reinventing the wheel, JaroMail reuses existing free and open source tools working since more than 10 years: executable | function -- | ZShell| scripting language Mutt | Mail User Agent Fetchmail | Mail Transport Agent MSmtp | the mini SMTP Mairix| search engine ABook | addressbook Elinks| HTML rendering A round-up on JaroMail features follows:  * Minimalistic interface with automatic threading * Targets intensive usage of mailinglists * Does whitelisting and integrates addressbooks * Can do search and backup using easy expressions * Automatically generates reusable filter rules (Sieve) * Computes and shows statistics on mail traffic * Secure password storage (GPG native, OSX and Gnome keyrings) * Stores e-mails locally in a reliable format (Maildir) * Defers connections, all operations run off-line * Checks SSL server certificates (imap, smtp) * Supports strong encryption messaging (GnuPG) * Sends completely anonymous emails (Mixmaster3) * Is multi platform: GNU/Linux/BSD, Apple/OSX * Old school, used by its author for the past 15 years # INSTALL **Apple/OSX** users can simply drag JaroMail into /Applications When started JaroMail opens a Terminal window preconfigured with its environment, to activate it for any terminal add this to `~/.profile`: : . /Applications/JaroMail.app/Contents/MacOS/jaroenv.sh Please note the dot and space at the beginning of the line above. **GNU/Linux** users can run `make` to install all needed components (done automatically, requires root) and compile auxiliary tools. Once compiled then `make install` will put JaroMail in `/usr/local`. The dependencies to be installed on the system for JaroMail are * build: `bison flex make autoconf automake sqlite3 libgnome-keyring-dev` * run: `fetchmail msmtp mutt mairix pinentry abook wipe` Bare in mind **you need to read the Manual**: this software is not graphical, it is not meant to be intuitive, does not contains eyecandies (except for stats on mail traffic). JaroMail is operated via Terminal, configured in plain text and overall made by geeks for geeks. # Manual and usage instructions For a brief overview see the commandline help: ``` jaro -h ``` When in doubt, make sure you read the User's Manual, it is important. Download the PDF: https://files.dyne.org/jaromail/jaromail-manual.pdf Or browse online the latest version: https://github.com/dyne/JaroMail/blob/master/doc/jaromail-manual.org # DEVELOPERS All revisioned in Git, see: https://github.com/dyne/JaroMail Pull requests and patches welcome, for an overview of current plans see [TODO](TODO.md) Our chat channel is **#dyne** on https://irc.dyne.org Make sure to idle in that channel, answers take some time to come. We are all idling artists. # DONATE Donations are very welcome and well needed. By donating you will encourage further development. https://www.dyne.org/donate # ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The JaroMail software and user's manual is conceived, designed and put together with a substantial amount of
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
On 05/12/2014 04:47 AM, d.garcia wrote: Which company is currently in the spotlight and today's designated Dr. Evil is less important than the legitimate hostility and generalised anger at the winner takes all economy of info capitalism that these companies collectively represent. This is the key point. Google represents the new managerialists because it's the most visible and also, the most hypocritical (Burning Man, fun, and all that). But what's impressive is how the Bay Area has become the single most important point of production for the software that organizes work and daily life for users of devices around the globe. US and especially Californian discourse is so apolitical that most of these new managerialists probably don't even realize the degree of direct algorithmic control they exert, nor the standardizing influence which their ethos, values, economic profiles and lifestyles is having on national and regional managerial classes everywhere else. This is a major social phenomenon of the early 21st century. The revolts against it have just begun. And btw, y'all could still dump your overpriced Mac OS for a nice Linux distro anytime! Don't forget the adblock either! best, BH # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
It is very important to understand and critic the political economy of this emerging new, and possibility of the logic it bears for building counter class(lessness) strategies. Flos IoE(E meaning Every progressive-revolutionary agency) political organising can counter the clash of titans by bringing forward real alternatives being there and developed. To apply the idea or mechanism of 'reaching critical mass' to manage to decrease the transaction (meaning organizational, articulational and mobilisations) costs, in order to allow the mass participation in the creation and egalitarian distribution of the 'political change value', as distributed societal power, can bring the change before this clash explode. Orsan On 12 mei 2014, at 11:47, "d.garcia" wrote: >> To me, it is somehow super clear that Facebook is evil. Not hard to >> understand. But Google? Why are tensions rising so high lately around >> them? Look at the tone of the Cory Doctorow blog post to Boing Boing? >> Don't get me wrong. But have they really gone down lately? In my >> humble view they are as evil as were a decade ago... What happened? >> Have we changed? > > Which company is currently in the spotlight and today's designated Dr. > Evil is less important than the legitimate hostility and generalised > anger at the winner takes all economy of info capitalism that these > companies collectively represent. Its a political economy which has > even departed from Adam Smith, as the creation of monopolies is > increasingly seen as a necessary condition for survival in a world > where transaction costs are near zero. In fact the imposition of > 'temporary' monopolies was even proposed by dreadful Larry Summers as > a last ditch policy to save capitalism in 2001 after the first dotcom > bubble burst. In the event he needn't have bothered it happened > anyway. <...> # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
tensions within the bay area elites
> To me, it is somehow super clear that Facebook is evil. Not hard to > understand. But Google? Why are tensions rising so high lately around > them? Look at the tone of the Cory Doctorow blog post to Boing Boing? > Don't get me wrong. But have they really gone down lately? In my > humble view they are as evil as were a decade ago... What happened? > Have we changed? Which company is currently in the spotlight and today's designated Dr. Evil is less important than the legitimate hostility and generalised anger at the winner takes all economy of info capitalism that these companies collectively represent. Its a political economy which has even departed from Adam Smith, as the creation of monopolies is increasingly seen as a necessary condition for survival in a world where transaction costs are near zero. In fact the imposition of 'temporary' monopolies was even proposed by dreadful Larry Summers as a last ditch policy to save capitalism in 2001 after the first dotcom bubble burst. In the event he needn't have bothered it happened anyway. The older heavy industries (even IBM) had to borrow heavily and issue equity to invest in ways that drove productivity and relatively secure employment. Today a company like Whatsapp (to take just one example) employs around 50 people and has a market value that is said to exceed Sony Corporation.. Once they reach critical mass the new info-companies do not need to borrow to invest. On the contrary, Smauglike, they sit on infinite piles of gold. The money is just not circulating. The hoarding vast piles of capital, the avoidance of tax, the employment tiny numbers, whilst simultaneously disrupting (and shrinking) established industries across the board is not an obvious recipe for winning any popularity contests. d a v i d g a r c i a new-tactical-research.co.uk # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
tensions within the bay area elites
Dear Geert & Co Just to add to the complexity of the picture, Google is a rather decentralized mess - every googler I meet works on his/her own separate pet project - so far unable as a whole to take a stand with its billion of users against govenrments and large corporations, or for that matter switch to the other "evil side" either as Microsoft, Apple and other older actors of the Bay Area have done before them. Three points of hope though: -The Snowden scandal was met not just with anger within Google but also with steadfast pragmatism. The comments I heard frmo the inside all concerned "war is a matter of resources" California/Confucian style, exposing the fact that the only employer in the U.S. employing more top-rate mathematicians than Google itself is - tada - the NSA! So Google regard the war as a matter of who has the most resources will eventually win. Here of course with Google being aware that "we the people" will eventually opt out of Google if a more secure alternative far from the NSA eventually pops up (I assume Darknet, Bitcoin, Silk Road style but for communication and easy to use etc). Google does not have any enemy businesswise now, the next decade likely to be their golden age (Android and You Tube being enormous power generators). Their threat is definitely from the future and they are aware of it. - Eric Schmidt's book with Jared Cohen is a piece of horrible carp and so far I have not met a single Google insider who did not agree. Schmidt seems to be the borrowed stupidface to keep Washington happy about Google whereabouts but carries none or little cred within the Google hydra itself. He is an outsider and a pretentious and narcissitic one too. Judging from the book he is also a complete idiot and a puppet for someone. The book is that bad. Schmidt is definitely not Google. - Brin and Page are still young enough to be driven by their personal ambition to have fun and live the Californian dream (Burning Man every year, etc). They do listen and are not so much evil as naive when leaving their algorithm-driven comfort zone. But then again, Google is already what Foucault would refer to as an institution driven by the credo of endless self-expansion and of ciurse fed by senseless ad profits. And therefore a lot more dangerous for its naivety than for its evil. Drones, batteries, will they get involved with commercial cannabis next? The odds are really low. Apple are after Tesla (for the battery technology more than the cars I assume), Google will keep purchasing Star Trek dreamery. Google or Facebook? Google anytime. But with Schmidt in the midst of a bunch of fun-seeking hippies, the world desperately needs alternatives to a company that controls 80% of search outside China and 90% of smartphone data traffic (including China) worldwide. And has not been able to escape the long arms of the NSA. Its their naivety towards all this concentrated power which scares the shit out of me. Brotherly love Alexander Bard # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
On 12/05/14 03:00, Brian Holmes wrote: > Doctorow is a somewhat different story, no? He may get himself flown > around the world to give talks, but he is not a full-fledged member of > this newly dominant class - all the more so since he seems to identify > himself at least partially with those on the outside of it. Both his > politics and his own quest for attention-market share lead him to see, > or at keast try to see, the new mangerialists as so many of his readers > do, with ambivalent admixtures of envy, fear and class hatred. A contemporary court jester, then, or should we say cyber jester? "Regarded as pets or mascots, they served not simply to amuse but to criticise their master or mistress and their guests. Queen Elizabeth (reigned 1558–1603) is said to have rebuked one of her fools for being insufficiently severe with her. Excessive behaviour, however, could lead to a fool being whipped, as Lear threatens to whip his fool." - The Royal Shakespeare Company quoted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jester Essential to the ruling elites across epochs, it seems. # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
Re: tensions within the bay area elites
On 05/11/2014 03:57 PM, Geert Lovink wrote: > To me, it is somehow super clear that Facebook is evil. Not hard to > understand. But Google? Why are tensions rising so high lately around them? > Look at the tone of the Cory Doctorow blog post to Boing Boing… Don't get me > wrong. But have they really gone down lately? In my humble view they are as > evil as were a decade ago... What happened? Have we changed? > I think many people have been switching back and forth between being suspicious, apprehensive and hopeful regarding Google - suspicious because of their centralization and monitoring, hopeful because of their technical cluefulness and huge contributions to free software, and apprehensive because of some of their inclinations towards right-wing politics - as in Schmidt's case. On the other hand, I don't see how Doctorow became part of the "bay area elites". He's a notoriously leftist British-Canadian science fiction writer living in London. He did live in SF once, but it might take more than that to become part of the local elite? # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
