Stolen from @vmstan

More analysis from @wiredfire:

It’s nothing to do with [difficulties in using multiple platforms]. It’s to do with the massive backlash they got on Fedi for their CEO being all Trumpy and somewhat horrible right wing. So they’ve run away because they were made to feel unwelcome on account of us not letting their BS fly.

Original screenshot is of the bio of https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy and wasn’t a post (that confused me for a sec).

  • green@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    First off, I am happy that your community is functional and that (at least for now) the capitalist structure works for you.

    The core of this issue lies in human-nature and incentive-structure. The thing is, majority of people never act as the ideal in any system. In fact most of the time, due to the often strict guidelines of systems, people act in bad faith. What this means is that any system, at all times, will have significant resistance to existing and will need sufficient guardrails to not fall apart. Why bring this up? Because capitalism has no guardrails.

    The “start another business” argument is not viable because (unfortunately) most people do not have the capital nor expertise to compete. An extremely high number of people on Earth do not own businesses, and there is a reason for this.

    The “rinse wash and repeat” argument also quickly falls apart because:

    1. The very very small population that has capital and expertise shrinks every time we do this
    2. The new businesses born are not likely to survive (based on startup failure rates)
    3. The more businesses, the harder it is to compete

    A significant amount of industries around the world are effective monopolies, there is a reason for this. Low capital pool, low talent pool, high failure rates, and high competition - means that once you make it out of development hell, you are almost always unrivaled and can easily destroy/outlast your competitors.

    Since we’re here, lets talk about incentive structure. Most people do not have disposable income, those that do are investors. In a system where money is the “goal”, the natural result is that the investors will be prioritized. This generally means that the end-user (me and you) are being exploited. Mom and Pop will not save you from the physics of money.

    The only thing I’ve seen “work” is when there is a community of strong moral fiber that refuses to sell out their neighbor. This is why I said I am happy for you, because this is extremely rare.

    As for the solution, any answer I give will be bad. This is a complex (not complicated!) issue and requires influential, smart, and rich people to work towards a goal for many years.

    That said, I am giving a bad answer anyway. We need a way to “miniaturize” infrastructure, with the end goal being distributed (decentralized) infrastructure. The reason being that we need to decouple the government and monopolies from the market. This is obviously extremely difficult to do, but I think it can be done. We actually have a lot of the tools for this (3d printers, foss, internet, etc) but the direction, knowledge, and polish aren’t there.

    Proton is a bandage solution to email being hijacked by Google and Microsoft - they used their infrastructure to turn an open protocol (email) into a closed implementation (you cant send email to your buddy without gmail). Proton is a middle ground where they respect us, but are also “in the club”. We wouldn’t need them if emails could simply be sent from my router to your router (tor has something like this).

    • rascalnikov@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I’m not too sure it’s as difficult as you are making it out to be. We see something similar with “black wall street” where black communities were committed to keeping their capital within their communities and black owned companies. We can even see this with the Amish and how they have survived as a community. I’m not completely sure if you can keep 100% of the capital within certain communities; but in a similar sense, we can at least attempt to be more meaningful with how and where we spend our money. The tech community chooses which company they support and do “business” with, similarly with fashion and many other things that aren’t completely necessary. I feel like that would at least be a start. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither will correcting the public’s spending habits. But it has been done and can be done again. There just needs to be the right incentive; to which, I’m not sure what that would be.