A technical is a civilian vehicle (typically a pickup truck) modified with a system for mounting weapons (typically machine guns or heavier, crew-operated weaponry) on it. An ongoing debate among military philosophers concerns whether a zamboni with a T-shirt cannon should be classified as one.
bitofhope
joined 2 years ago
My mom has a Dyson ~~sphere~~ Ball. It sucks, which is actually good in this case because that's what it's supposed to do.
There certainly are users, both on Windows and Linux who do "hack out" these things. With Firefox it can range from just going through the small hassle of unticking the sponsor option in settings to making forks like the LibreWolf which people seem to like. When the Ubuntu Amazon thing was ongoing I recall people switching desktop environments and even distros in protest and for Windows I know people who hunt elusive enterprise only versions or even Chinese market editions of the OS to avoid the ads.
I usually appreciate it when distros avoid fucking with the upstream versions of the software they package, so in the occasional case like this where the upstream decides to ship a shitty "feature" I would actually prefer being patched out by the distro package maintainers, I don't mind accepting the responsibility of just turning off the setting or compiling a fork on my own if necessary.
I mean sure, all gatgetbahns are grifts, but not all grifts are gadgetbahns you know
Curtis Yarvin goes to prison. He has two cellmates. He asks them why they're there. "I helped Trump destroy the country", one of them replies. "Well I'm here because Trump didn't destroy the country", Yarvin retorts. They turn to the third man, who says: "I am Donald Trump."
Another, a little more snide name I came up with while writing that: "free drinks tomorrow" tech, after a popular sign seen on the walls of bars around the world.
I'd describe it as parasitic disruption. The scam analogies are on point and fine for rhetorical purposes, but they imply a degree of intentionality which is not necessary for some tech to be parasitic.
Say you invent a new type of electical power line that's more durable and power efficient than the existing type. The materials are also ten times more expensive than for the same length of normal power line and the only factory making this type of power line can only make enough to fill the needs of a few small customers with special needs. Meanwhile local government in Eriador is planning the electrification of the Shire community when the well-meaning councilor Brandybuck mentions this new type of power line he read about in a magazine. Perhaps the council should wait and see how that develops before committing to building power lines that might be obsolete the moment they're put up.
Neither you nor the councilor are deliberately using your invention as a tool to stall electrification of the Shire, but the same effect happens anyway.
You point about property B is a pretty good one. My hunch is that tech follies like these are related to economic bubbles and share similarities with them. I'll postulate that most parasitic disruptions go hand in hand with economic bubbles, but not necessarily all of them.
Good observation. I'd like to add that it's not very straightforward to monetize a social networking site. The usual method would be ads, but the profit margins on those are thin, competition is rough and the audience does not like them. Otherwise you could probably derive monetary value from the soft power that comes with controlling a large communications platform of any kind, but it's a lot harder to put a firm price tag on something like that and not everyone has the finesse and strategy to tap into that power.
Both of those monetization strategies work a hell of a lot better with a highly centralized and walled platform. Desperately trying to get people to pay more attention to the protocol that's supposed to let them build competing sites with a low friction of migrating between them is the exact opposite of what you would do if you wanted your business model to be running a social networking site.
I would need someone with a big business brain to explain to me why a company focused on building the tools for competition against it and giving them away for free would ever seem like a sound investment. If I could give people VC money to publish telecommunications protocol specifications, I'd probably just sponsor IETF instead.
It's unfortunate that Linux is not immune to this. I noticed this happening to Firefox on a Linux machine and there was the debacle with Amazon search in Ubuntu's menu about a decade ago. It seems a lot less endemic, though.
Same for me on Linux.
I agree that Bluesky's attempts to not look monolithic have a certain flavor of opendetergent to them. However, I think their situation is a little more complex and quite a bit funnier. When the Bluesky people claim that their main thing is the protocol and the app was meant to be just a proof of concept, I'm inclined to believe them.
Bluesky is extremely popular among leftists and queer people and the company hates that. The right wingers seem content to stay on X the everything app and have little reason to switch even if Bluesky were to smoke the woke out and decimate its core userbase. The app needs to be popular for the protocol to stay even a little bit relevant.
Meanwhile Mastodon exists. It's much more decentralized and a lot of people hate that. Bluesky users like having a single website with a single moderation authority, even if that moderation authority resents the demographics of that website.
If another twitter clone on AT Protocol somehow manages to gain enough of a critical mass to make Bluesky meaningfully not a monolith, that might well spell quick doom for the entire site. If AT makes migrating your account as easy as the developers are making it sound, I expect a big chunk of the users to jump ship as soon as an instance run by someone less transphobic gains enough traction.
No.