this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
233 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

58424 readers
4654 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MagnumDovetails@lemmy.world 48 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I like Doctorow, and these point are valid. I just don’t see the American government doing anything to benefit the people, regardless of left or right orientation. Most Americans want abortion access and reasonable restrictions on gun sales; I can’t imagine any candidates, local or federal doing little more than making empty promises on these subjects. Even Obama care is a hugely compromised husk of reasonable healthcare for all, and you still have republicans clamoring to dismantle it.

I hate to be pessimistic, but I don’t think any American politician would take on this topic.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 10 points 7 hours ago

I don’t think any American politician would take on this topic.

That's the feature

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 98 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Another way to encourage interoperability is to use the government to hold out a carrot in addition to the stick. Through government procurement laws, governments could require any company providing a product or service to the government to not interfere with interoperability. President Lincoln required standard tooling for bullets and rifles during the Civil War, so there’s a long history of requiring this already. If companies don’t want to play nice, they’ll lose out on some lucrative contracts, “but no one forces a tech company to do business with the federal government.”

That's actually a very interesting idea. This benefits the govt as much as anyone else too. It reduces switching costs for govt tech.

[–] Benjaben@lemmy.world 26 points 8 hours ago

Can confirm, I've worked for a company doing govt contract work and I really don't know what it'd take for us to have walked away. They can dictate whatever terms they like and still expect to find plenty of companies happy to bid for contracts I think.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Except the tech companies are among the politicians' biggest "donors".

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 11 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Except the tech companies are among the politicians’ biggest “donors”.

Public cloud computing companies that want to host government IT workloads still have to be Fedramp compliant. Doesn't matter how much their donors pay, if they aren't Fedramp compliant they can't bid for the work.

[–] AustralianSimon@lemmy.world 1 points 15 minutes ago

Yeah but donations can help make procurement tenders slightly in favour of donors. Or get inside scoop so they have time to be ready.

[–] Chronographs@lemmy.zip 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

This is nice and all but any solution requires a government captured by capital to work against capital feels as likely to work as thoughts and prayers.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 27 points 8 hours ago

Better than completely allowing capital to do whatever it wants without even attempting to push back.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 hours ago

Yup. All of these "solutions" that sound original are known. The reason we don't apply them isn't because we don't know how to solve these issues, it's because capital has pulled the handbrake. This is the problem we have to solve. All the other problems fall downstream and will magically start getting solved if we can release the handbrake. If we're not talking about how to reduce regulatory capture, we're not taking about real solutions.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

Friendly reminder: Dotorow's wife is a director of a Disney subsidiary highly likely to be involved with DRM.

Ms Taylor is now the Director, StudioLab at The Walt Disney Studios. In that role she is responsible for ensuring that Disney continues to invest in the intersection between online tech and content distribution.

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 3 points 40 minutes ago

Is he, or has he ever been, a communist or associated with communists! We demand an answer!

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Her running MakieLab (which might indeed utilise DRM, idk) doesn't invalidate her husband's point.

[–] knova@infosec.pub 27 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Does that invalidate his point regarding enshittification?

I think it might matter if Cory came out and said, I am starting an org with the resources to fix it. But I don’t see how this tidbit is relevant for a guy who coined the term about what’s happening here and has been beating the drum about the problem.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago

Yeah this feels like a “no true Scot” fallacy to me, where anything he says should be invalid because of his wife’s position, which is false

[–] dtrain@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

See Kelly Ann Conway and George Conway.