I didn’t mean you specifically but I’m so glad that happened! I’ve recently left the US but while there I was active with DSA, labor organizing, and a local urbanist collective. My biggest gripe with the American left was always their insistence on throwing their weight behind this or that Democrat. Maybe now it will finally be clear that mass mobilization is the only way forward. We did this in the 1930s and we can do it again today.
Please actually do this. Not on the internet. Join a local activist chapter. Go to the meetings. Use your speaking voice. Contrary to what politicians and corporations tell you, it is possible to organize society in a way that does not result in oligarchy.
I bought one from Aventon. It was easy to repair and didn’t require anything special.
What I find interesting about this article is that it critiques heavily about the first 200 pages, says almost nothing about the next 600, and then says the conclusion is unsatisfactory because it didn’t quote the book the author wrote in 1991. It’s transparently personal.
Academics write books. Get over it.
Yeah it’s a summary work that draws on decades of research. Both of these authors are extremely well-published in their respective fields. I’m like a third of the way through Dawn of Everything and it’s just as academic as “Debt” was, and neither are mass-market pulp. But work like this always draws hit pieces because it’s a way for critics to get their name out there.
Check out “The Dawn of Everything” by Wengrow and Graeber
What is wrong with it? I’ve been using it for years and it does what it’s supposed to do.
Removing these biases is the whole point of public funding for things. Everyone shares the same resources and people who have more wealth give more. The fact that major institutions that perform public functions rely on private donations is the problem.
To illistrate this, I just typed “restaurants” in Google Maps in downtown Prague and the first result was an ad for KFC (it looked like a real result but it said “sponsored” on top). But I do have a US phone.
Chomsky’s stroke came at a really critical time and we could use a successor to point out how idiotic the whole movement is.
The idea that LLMs are anywhere close to having the general intelligence needed to comprehend this kind of statement is ludicrous.
Legitimately curious about the stockings. I get all the other jokes in this thread but that one went over my head.
I haven’t been over there in a while but I noticed the AIs are starting to show up here. How was it over there? Rough percentage of how many?
And Aaron Swartz is dead.
It’s called digital enclosure. Enclosure was a movement that began in Britain in the 1700s (but really it’s always been going on…) to close off the commons that pastoralists had been using to publicly graze their sheep. It happens to all new media because it’s the only way capitalists can imagine their operations.
Not this one. Environmental scientists end up cleaning up after them.
Then when you go to grad school you realize you have to like all of them.
deleted by creator
Sure, no arguments there. I guess it’s the “green” label I take issue with. Carbon-free capitalism is definitely possible as long as there are enough critical elements to produce all of the necessary solar panels and wind turbines (and I guess fusion reactors if we’re really ambitious about printing money 🤑). I do wonder about rent collection long-term though, especially with such decentralized energy sources. Overproduction will also come sooner than everyone thinks. But I guess these are much better problems to have than imminent eco-catastrophe.
There’s something called an environmental Kuznets curve that suggests that a population will sacrifice environmental health to industrial degradation in favor of per capita income up to a point, after which they are affluent enough to care, and after this environmental health improves. China seems to be at the inflection point.