• tinsukE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Love how it highlights that big tech (much to capitalism’s fault, TBH) can only drive innovation if the tech has a moat around it, if no one else can, or would, copy it and deploy it at a lower cost.

    Which is… the argument that people use to defend capitalism? That capitalism drives innovation and makes it accessible to everyone at the lowest possible price.

    I like the frugal tech idea as much as I like degrowth.

    • eldebryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 hours ago

      That’s basically saying that “big tech” (as we know it today) and competition-friendly capitalism just cannot coexist. Which I’m inclined to agree with.

      • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        There’s no reason you couldn’t have people grow a new Internet that isn’t reliant on AWS and cloud flare and other big tech stuff, it’s just that it’s much easier to do that since it’s already there. And you still have the problems with spammers even if you try to move away from capitalism.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Frugal tech idea and degrowth are more capitalist than a handful of monopolies owning you in every orifice and billing you for it.

      If by “capitalism” we don’t mean paleo-industrialism of XIX-century aristocrats with monocles and child labor. If we do mean the “free market with protections for property, rights, safety and anti-monopoly regulations yadda-yadda” moderate-normal-classical model.