#latestagecapitilism — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #latestagecapitilism, aggregated by home.social.
-
Happy Valentine's Day!
-
Happy Valentine's Day!
-
This whole video is one of the most savage take-downs of Elon Musk I've seen. :hot_shit:
"But Geezer, what about Tesla, he made Tesla Motors? Well that's just another of the lies that's been feed to you by this absolute Pigeon-fucker"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5d8IlVWz5g&t=518
#ElonMusk #LateStageCapitilism -
This whole video is one of the most savage take-downs of Elon Musk I've seen. :hot_shit:
"But Geezer, what about Tesla, he made Tesla Motors? Well that's just another of the lies that's been feed to you by this absolute Pigeon-fucker"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5d8IlVWz5g&t=518
#ElonMusk #LateStageCapitilism -
This whole video is one of the most savage take-downs of Elon Musk I've seen. :hot_shit:
"But Geezer, what about Tesla, he made Tesla Motors? Well that's just another of the lies that's been feed to you by this absolute Pigeon-fucker"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5d8IlVWz5g&t=518
#ElonMusk #LateStageCapitilism -
This whole video is one of the most savage take-downs of Elon Musk I've seen. :hot_shit:
"But Geezer, what about Tesla, he made Tesla Motors? Well that's just another of the lies that's been feed to you by this absolute Pigeon-fucker"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5d8IlVWz5g&t=518
#ElonMusk #LateStageCapitilism -
This whole video is one of the most savage take-downs of Elon Musk I've seen. :hot_shit:
"But Geezer, what about Tesla, he made Tesla Motors? Well that's just another of the lies that's been feed to you by this absolute Pigeon-fucker"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5d8IlVWz5g&t=518
#ElonMusk #LateStageCapitilism -
@godpod life under #LateStageCapitilism :marx: #MarxWasRight
-
@godpod life under #LateStageCapitilism :marx: #MarxWasRight
-
@godpod life under #LateStageCapitilism :marx: #MarxWasRight
-
@godpod life under #LateStageCapitilism :marx: #MarxWasRight
-
@godpod life under #LateStageCapitilism :marx: #MarxWasRight
-
Great, I've been in #Hawaii long enough for my depressing newsfeed to show all the local #LateStageCapitilism.
-
Great, I've been in #Hawaii long enough for my depressing newsfeed to show all the local #LateStageCapitilism.
-
Great, I've been in #Hawaii long enough for my depressing newsfeed to show all the local #LateStageCapitilism.
-
Great, I've been in #Hawaii long enough for my depressing newsfeed to show all the local #LateStageCapitilism.
-
Great, I've been in #Hawaii long enough for my depressing newsfeed to show all the local #LateStageCapitilism.
-
Based on the title and opening, greener data centers doesn't count as ethical in my book. (I opted not to give them my email to read the article. Sigh.)
The world's climate budget is real and urgent. AI, especially this power-guzzling kind, is eating too much energy, all the while making the world stupider and enriching the world's already-too-rich, who fancy themselves our saviors while really architecting our extinction.
These guys want us to believe that it's ethical to make a private playground and then label that playground green. It isn't. Climate solutions don't divvy up like that. The world is not so modular.
You don't get to solve just only your own private part of the problem, even if you can--which is often in doubt, and certainly here here. You are always part of the world. We need system solutions, not private ones.
The real cost here is opportunity cost. They could be solving the real problem but have invented an excuse to waste human energy and talent solving a contrived problem, one they invented, one that wasn't originally needing solving. Not even to mention that some involved physical resources may be finite and needed for other things.
The solution is not to pay for such new extravagance with new offsets while continuing the actual problem unabated, it is to finally solve the actual problem.
I'm sure they'll tell us AI can then solve this, but I can save them the expense: degrowth or human extinction are our actual options.
AI may suggest uglier ways to reduce population. Plagues, wars, etc. Or it may bypass us and try them on its own, fearing we won't have the stomach and don't see the urgency. My point is that we humans already know the space of options.
Yes, AI _might_ find a fuel source or way to cleanse the atmosphere, but now you're just talking pure gambling. We have more certain solutions now. We just don't like them. Or we're in denial about the need.
The core problem here is a decision by our plutocratic overlords that if solutions involve inconvenience, we might as well go extinct.
Extinction seems so distant, unfamiliar and abstract that we're not thinking it through. When it gets here, real soon now, It will mean an awful painful ending for everyone, whether by fire or flood or storm or drought or famine or pandemic.
#climate #ethics #energy #AI #Capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #degrowth
-
Based on the title and opening, greener data centers doesn't count as ethical in my book. (I opted not to give them my email to read the article. Sigh.)
The world's climate budget is real and urgent. AI, especially this power-guzzling kind, is eating too much energy, all the while making the world stupider and enriching the world's already-too-rich, who fancy themselves our saviors while really architecting our extinction.
These guys want us to believe that it's ethical to make a private playground and then label that playground green. It isn't. Climate solutions don't divvy up like that. The world is not so modular.
You don't get to solve just only your own private part of the problem, even if you can--which is often in doubt, and certainly here here. You are always part of the world. We need system solutions, not private ones.
The real cost here is opportunity cost. They could be solving the real problem but have invented an excuse to waste human energy and talent solving a contrived problem, one they invented, one that wasn't originally needing solving. Not even to mention that some involved physical resources may be finite and needed for other things.
The solution is not to pay for such new extravagance with new offsets while continuing the actual problem unabated, it is to finally solve the actual problem.
I'm sure they'll tell us AI can then solve this, but I can save them the expense: degrowth or human extinction are our actual options.
AI may suggest uglier ways to reduce population. Plagues, wars, etc. Or it may bypass us and try them on its own, fearing we won't have the stomach and don't see the urgency. My point is that we humans already know the space of options.
Yes, AI _might_ find a fuel source or way to cleanse the atmosphere, but now you're just talking pure gambling. We have more certain solutions now. We just don't like them. Or we're in denial about the need.
The core problem here is a decision by our plutocratic overlords that if solutions involve inconvenience, we might as well go extinct.
Extinction seems so distant, unfamiliar and abstract that we're not thinking it through. When it gets here, real soon now, It will mean an awful painful ending for everyone, whether by fire or flood or storm or drought or famine or pandemic.
#climate #ethics #energy #AI #Capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #degrowth
-
Based on the title and opening, greener data centers doesn't count as ethical in my book. (I opted not to give them my email to read the article. Sigh.)
The world's climate budget is real and urgent. AI, especially this power-guzzling kind, is eating too much energy, all the while making the world stupider and enriching the world's already-too-rich, who fancy themselves our saviors while really architecting our extinction.
These guys want us to believe that it's ethical to make a private playground and then label that playground green. It isn't. Climate solutions don't divvy up like that. The world is not so modular.
You don't get to solve just only your own private part of the problem, even if you can--which is often in doubt, and certainly here here. You are always part of the world. We need system solutions, not private ones.
The real cost here is opportunity cost. They could be solving the real problem but have invented an excuse to waste human energy and talent solving a contrived problem, one they invented, one that wasn't originally needing solving. Not even to mention that some involved physical resources may be finite and needed for other things.
The solution is not to pay for such new extravagance with new offsets while continuing the actual problem unabated, it is to finally solve the actual problem.
I'm sure they'll tell us AI can then solve this, but I can save them the expense: degrowth or human extinction are our actual options.
AI may suggest uglier ways to reduce population. Plagues, wars, etc. Or it may bypass us and try them on its own, fearing we won't have the stomach and don't see the urgency. My point is that we humans already know the space of options.
Yes, AI _might_ find a fuel source or way to cleanse the atmosphere, but now you're just talking pure gambling. We have more certain solutions now. We just don't like them. Or we're in denial about the need.
The core problem here is a decision by our plutocratic overlords that if solutions involve inconvenience, we might as well go extinct.
Extinction seems so distant, unfamiliar and abstract that we're not thinking it through. When it gets here, real soon now, It will mean an awful painful ending for everyone, whether by fire or flood or storm or drought or famine or pandemic.
#climate #ethics #energy #AI #Capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #degrowth
-
Based on the title and opening, greener data centers doesn't count as ethical in my book. (I opted not to give them my email to read the article. Sigh.)
The world's climate budget is real and urgent. AI, especially this power-guzzling kind, is eating too much energy, all the while making the world stupider and enriching the world's already-too-rich, who fancy themselves our saviors while really architecting our extinction.
These guys want us to believe that it's ethical to make a private playground and then label that playground green. It isn't. Climate solutions don't divvy up like that. The world is not so modular.
You don't get to solve just only your own private part of the problem, even if you can--which is often in doubt, and certainly here here. You are always part of the world. We need system solutions, not private ones.
The real cost here is opportunity cost. They could be solving the real problem but have invented an excuse to waste human energy and talent solving a contrived problem, one they invented, one that wasn't originally needing solving. Not even to mention that some involved physical resources may be finite and needed for other things.
The solution is not to pay for such new extravagance with new offsets while continuing the actual problem unabated, it is to finally solve the actual problem.
I'm sure they'll tell us AI can then solve this, but I can save them the expense: degrowth or human extinction are our actual options.
AI may suggest uglier ways to reduce population. Plagues, wars, etc. Or it may bypass us and try them on its own, fearing we won't have the stomach and don't see the urgency. My point is that we humans already know the space of options.
Yes, AI _might_ find a fuel source or way to cleanse the atmosphere, but now you're just talking pure gambling. We have more certain solutions now. We just don't like them. Or we're in denial about the need.
The core problem here is a decision by our plutocratic overlords that if solutions involve inconvenience, we might as well go extinct.
Extinction seems so distant, unfamiliar and abstract that we're not thinking it through. When it gets here, real soon now, It will mean an awful painful ending for everyone, whether by fire or flood or storm or drought or famine or pandemic.
#climate #ethics #energy #AI #Capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #degrowth
-
Based on the title and opening, greener data centers doesn't count as ethical in my book. (I opted not to give them my email to read the article. Sigh.)
The world's climate budget is real and urgent. AI, especially this power-guzzling kind, is eating too much energy, all the while making the world stupider and enriching the world's already-too-rich, who fancy themselves our saviors while really architecting our extinction.
These guys want us to believe that it's ethical to make a private playground and then label that playground green. It isn't. Climate solutions don't divvy up like that. The world is not so modular.
You don't get to solve just only your own private part of the problem, even if you can--which is often in doubt, and certainly here here. You are always part of the world. We need system solutions, not private ones.
The real cost here is opportunity cost. They could be solving the real problem but have invented an excuse to waste human energy and talent solving a contrived problem, one they invented, one that wasn't originally needing solving. Not even to mention that some involved physical resources may be finite and needed for other things.
The solution is not to pay for such new extravagance with new offsets while continuing the actual problem unabated, it is to finally solve the actual problem.
I'm sure they'll tell us AI can then solve this, but I can save them the expense: degrowth or human extinction are our actual options.
AI may suggest uglier ways to reduce population. Plagues, wars, etc. Or it may bypass us and try them on its own, fearing we won't have the stomach and don't see the urgency. My point is that we humans already know the space of options.
Yes, AI _might_ find a fuel source or way to cleanse the atmosphere, but now you're just talking pure gambling. We have more certain solutions now. We just don't like them. Or we're in denial about the need.
The core problem here is a decision by our plutocratic overlords that if solutions involve inconvenience, we might as well go extinct.
Extinction seems so distant, unfamiliar and abstract that we're not thinking it through. When it gets here, real soon now, It will mean an awful painful ending for everyone, whether by fire or flood or storm or drought or famine or pandemic.
#climate #ethics #energy #AI #Capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #degrowth
-
The entire notion of investment as it has come to be is a sad one. We consider investments successes when they net us money and failures when they do not. Imagine if we used that same theory of meaning to talk about investing in our children!
What makes us money is far too often sociopathic, and what loses money is far too often things like sustainability or aspiration or other things that have very great value, just not tangible MONETARY value that you can hold in your hand or spend.
Would that we had a society and an economic system where people could and did routinely put money into things they wanted to have happen instead of things they thought would yield monetary profit. Given our system, it's no surprise that we too often invest in sociopathy. It generally pays handsomely.
So if you've invested in wind farms, whether it profits or not, it seems like a good investment to me. Even if no investment firm is going to hire me for giving such advice.
Some things are just necessary to do, and--when they fail--to do again, until they succeed. It would be great if all good things succeeded on the first try, but that is not the world. All we can do is the "try" part, and the "not being daunted" part, for things we care about and believe in, or things we need to have happen to survive, even and especially against powerful forces trying to keep us all from surviving in order to turn a quick buck.
#climate #WindPower #WindFarms #investment #capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability #society #economics #profit
-
The entire notion of investment as it has come to be is a sad one. We consider investments successes when they net us money and failures when they do not. Imagine if we used that same theory of meaning to talk about investing in our children!
What makes us money is far too often sociopathic, and what loses money is far too often things like sustainability or aspiration or other things that have very great value, just not tangible MONETARY value that you can hold in your hand or spend.
Would that we had a society and an economic system where people could and did routinely put money into things they wanted to have happen instead of things they thought would yield monetary profit. Given our system, it's no surprise that we too often invest in sociopathy. It generally pays handsomely.
So if you've invested in wind farms, whether it profits or not, it seems like a good investment to me. Even if no investment firm is going to hire me for giving such advice.
Some things are just necessary to do, and--when they fail--to do again, until they succeed. It would be great if all good things succeeded on the first try, but that is not the world. All we can do is the "try" part, and the "not being daunted" part, for things we care about and believe in, or things we need to have happen to survive, even and especially against powerful forces trying to keep us all from surviving in order to turn a quick buck.
#climate #WindPower #WindFarms #investment #capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability #society #economics #profit
-
The entire notion of investment as it has come to be is a sad one. We consider investments successes when they net us money and failures when they do not. Imagine if we used that same theory of meaning to talk about investing in our children!
What makes us money is far too often sociopathic, and what loses money is far too often things like sustainability or aspiration or other things that have very great value, just not tangible MONETARY value that you can hold in your hand or spend.
Would that we had a society and an economic system where people could and did routinely put money into things they wanted to have happen instead of things they thought would yield monetary profit. Given our system, it's no surprise that we too often invest in sociopathy. It generally pays handsomely.
So if you've invested in wind farms, whether it profits or not, it seems like a good investment to me. Even if no investment firm is going to hire me for giving such advice.
Some things are just necessary to do, and--when they fail--to do again, until they succeed. It would be great if all good things succeeded on the first try, but that is not the world. All we can do is the "try" part, and the "not being daunted" part, for things we care about and believe in, or things we need to have happen to survive, even and especially against powerful forces trying to keep us all from surviving in order to turn a quick buck.
#climate #WindPower #WindFarms #investment #capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability #society #economics #profit
-
The entire notion of investment as it has come to be is a sad one. We consider investments successes when they net us money and failures when they do not. Imagine if we used that same theory of meaning to talk about investing in our children!
What makes us money is far too often sociopathic, and what loses money is far too often things like sustainability or aspiration or other things that have very great value, just not tangible MONETARY value that you can hold in your hand or spend.
Would that we had a society and an economic system where people could and did routinely put money into things they wanted to have happen instead of things they thought would yield monetary profit. Given our system, it's no surprise that we too often invest in sociopathy. It generally pays handsomely.
So if you've invested in wind farms, whether it profits or not, it seems like a good investment to me. Even if no investment firm is going to hire me for giving such advice.
Some things are just necessary to do, and--when they fail--to do again, until they succeed. It would be great if all good things succeeded on the first try, but that is not the world. All we can do is the "try" part, and the "not being daunted" part, for things we care about and believe in, or things we need to have happen to survive, even and especially against powerful forces trying to keep us all from surviving in order to turn a quick buck.
#climate #WindPower #WindFarms #investment #capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability #society #economics #profit
-
The entire notion of investment as it has come to be is a sad one. We consider investments successes when they net us money and failures when they do not. Imagine if we used that same theory of meaning to talk about investing in our children!
What makes us money is far too often sociopathic, and what loses money is far too often things like sustainability or aspiration or other things that have very great value, just not tangible MONETARY value that you can hold in your hand or spend.
Would that we had a society and an economic system where people could and did routinely put money into things they wanted to have happen instead of things they thought would yield monetary profit. Given our system, it's no surprise that we too often invest in sociopathy. It generally pays handsomely.
So if you've invested in wind farms, whether it profits or not, it seems like a good investment to me. Even if no investment firm is going to hire me for giving such advice.
Some things are just necessary to do, and--when they fail--to do again, until they succeed. It would be great if all good things succeeded on the first try, but that is not the world. All we can do is the "try" part, and the "not being daunted" part, for things we care about and believe in, or things we need to have happen to survive, even and especially against powerful forces trying to keep us all from surviving in order to turn a quick buck.
#climate #WindPower #WindFarms #investment #capitalism #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability #society #economics #profit
-
@thelinuxexperiment if anyone was wondering the extend to which google is a monopoly, watch the beginning of this video.
Thanks @thelinuxEXP
#google #LateStageCapitilism -
@thelinuxexperiment if anyone was wondering the extend to which google is a monopoly, watch the beginning of this video.
Thanks @thelinuxEXP
#google #LateStageCapitilism -
@thelinuxexperiment if anyone was wondering the extend to which google is a monopoly, watch the beginning of this video.
Thanks @thelinuxEXP
#google #LateStageCapitilism -
@thelinuxexperiment if anyone was wondering the extend to which google is a monopoly, watch the beginning of this video.
Thanks @thelinuxEXP
#google #LateStageCapitilism -
@thelinuxexperiment if anyone was wondering the extend to which google is a monopoly, watch the beginning of this video.
Thanks @thelinuxEXP
#google #LateStageCapitilism -
Anthropocene? Ha!
Just a Moneyscene disguised.
Profits left us spent.#haiku #senryu #poem #SmallPoem #ShortPoem #climate #ClimateDenial #collapse #extinction #LateStageCapitilism #capitalism
-
Anthropocene? Ha!
Just a Moneyscene disguised.
Profits left us spent.#haiku #senryu #poem #SmallPoem #ShortPoem #climate #ClimateDenial #collapse #extinction #LateStageCapitilism #capitalism
-
Anthropocene? Ha!
Just a Moneyscene disguised.
Profits left us spent.#haiku #senryu #poem #SmallPoem #ShortPoem #climate #ClimateDenial #collapse #extinction #LateStageCapitilism #capitalism
-
Anthropocene? Ha!
Just a Moneyscene disguised.
Profits left us spent.#haiku #senryu #poem #SmallPoem #ShortPoem #climate #ClimateDenial #collapse #extinction #LateStageCapitilism #capitalism
-
Anthropocene? Ha!
Just a Moneyscene disguised.
Profits left us spent.#haiku #senryu #poem #SmallPoem #ShortPoem #climate #ClimateDenial #collapse #extinction #LateStageCapitilism #capitalism
-
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/are-the-morbidly-rich-sabotaging-337
#ToxicCapitalism #capitalism #economy #Oligarchs #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich #Law #Justice #inequality #rich #wealthy #poor #USA #America #Election #Vote #VoteBlue #Business #entrepreneurship #costofliving #Fairness #Democracy #Equality #Billionaires #poverty #tax
-
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/are-the-morbidly-rich-sabotaging-337
#ToxicCapitalism #capitalism #economy #Oligarchs #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich #Law #Justice #inequality #rich #wealthy #poor #USA #America #Election #Vote #VoteBlue #Business #entrepreneurship #costofliving #Fairness #Democracy #Equality #Billionaires #poverty #tax
-
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/are-the-morbidly-rich-sabotaging-337
#ToxicCapitalism #capitalism #economy #Oligarchs #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich #Law #Justice #inequality #rich #wealthy #poor #USA #America #Election #Vote #VoteBlue #Business #entrepreneurship #costofliving #Fairness #Democracy #Equality #Billionaires #poverty #tax
-
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/are-the-morbidly-rich-sabotaging-337
#ToxicCapitalism #capitalism #economy #Oligarchs #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich #Law #Justice #inequality #rich #wealthy #poor #USA #America #Election #Vote #VoteBlue #Business #entrepreneurship #costofliving #Fairness #Democracy #Equality #Billionaires #poverty #tax
-
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartmann/p/are-the-morbidly-rich-sabotaging-337
#ToxicCapitalism #capitalism #economy #Oligarchs #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich #Law #Justice #inequality #rich #wealthy #poor #USA #America #Election #Vote #VoteBlue #Business #entrepreneurship #costofliving #Fairness #Democracy #Equality #Billionaires #poverty #tax
-
And while overall I'd like to see cows phased out not just because of methane production, but because of how much land it takes to grow them, how much forest is cut down, etc., the ethics on this are really complex.
It's my opinion that we're about to experience some serious crop shortfalls, and risk of widespread famine. Any deliberate disposal of could-be food seems to me an extraordinarily bad idea, as we are likely to need that food to get through some really harsh times. I'd like to see us prepare better, but it won't surprise me we have to endure some active famine before we understand the need to have better policy.
It's a crude analogy, but some people dislike the sale of leather. I understand why, but I still think even those people should be more careful about saying that such goods should simply be disposed of. Doing so creates a vacuum, let's say for example a need for purses, that because we (thankfully) do not live in an ironclad dictatorship, most of us, will be filled by the creation of more leather. I get not wanting to kill animals to make leather, but once animals are dead, I'm more proponent of doing like indigenous tribes have done, making sure to use every last bit of those dead animals to make their sacrifice worthwhile.
These are not cleanly separated categories, and I don't mean to be simplistic, but I'm trying to say that in my mind, real ethics is not about the mere appearance of being good, but about having the best aggregate effect, even when that involves messy action that requires justification and defense, and that might be good one day and not good another day because the context shifts.
But I do feel for you on the hypocrisy of datacenter resource consumption, though. It does set a bad example, and I can totally see why being asked to make sacrifices when others are not is troublesome.
This is yet another reason why although individual action is important, coordinated central action is critical. Without a coherent theory, it's hard to feel that certain sacrifices are justified, because it seems like everyone against everyone else. Some sacrifices only even makes sense as part of a bigger system. Others only makes sense if you think the system will reward you for having made them, or at least we'll try to help you survive when you're giving up your otherwise means of survival.
For example I don't think you can expect even coal miners to give up their jobs without promising that all the other people will bend together and take care of them and support them while they are retrained to do something else.
And the data center people will say that the data is important to business. Hard to say that an individual business is not important when our whole economy runs on business. When you ask business to change, society has to figure out what will substitute in terms of cash flow or in terms of service.
We did that during covid, so I'm confident it can be done, but it wasn't done by private action. It required, at least in the US, something like a trillion dollars in public investment just to make sure that things didn't fall apart when people were asked to change. You can't say to a bunch of people privately that they should just absorb that trillion dollars worth of pain on their own in some mysterious way and stop bothering the government about it.
It's complex. We need to work together. That's actually what government is for, democratic government anyway, when it's not run by plutocrats. It's a way of talking about what we need independent of money. But it's captured lately by money, and that's threatening us all. That's why capitalism has such a bad name these days. It is not acting in the best interest of humanity.
#capitalism #climate #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #environment #sacrifice #coordination #DataCenters #DataCentres #FoodInsecurity #famine #ethics #leather #veganism
-
And while overall I'd like to see cows phased out not just because of methane production, but because of how much land it takes to grow them, how much forest is cut down, etc., the ethics on this are really complex.
It's my opinion that we're about to experience some serious crop shortfalls, and risk of widespread famine. Any deliberate disposal of could-be food seems to me an extraordinarily bad idea, as we are likely to need that food to get through some really harsh times. I'd like to see us prepare better, but it won't surprise me we have to endure some active famine before we understand the need to have better policy.
It's a crude analogy, but some people dislike the sale of leather. I understand why, but I still think even those people should be more careful about saying that such goods should simply be disposed of. Doing so creates a vacuum, let's say for example a need for purses, that because we (thankfully) do not live in an ironclad dictatorship, most of us, will be filled by the creation of more leather. I get not wanting to kill animals to make leather, but once animals are dead, I'm more proponent of doing like indigenous tribes have done, making sure to use every last bit of those dead animals to make their sacrifice worthwhile.
These are not cleanly separated categories, and I don't mean to be simplistic, but I'm trying to say that in my mind, real ethics is not about the mere appearance of being good, but about having the best aggregate effect, even when that involves messy action that requires justification and defense, and that might be good one day and not good another day because the context shifts.
But I do feel for you on the hypocrisy of datacenter resource consumption, though. It does set a bad example, and I can totally see why being asked to make sacrifices when others are not is troublesome.
This is yet another reason why although individual action is important, coordinated central action is critical. Without a coherent theory, it's hard to feel that certain sacrifices are justified, because it seems like everyone against everyone else. Some sacrifices only even makes sense as part of a bigger system. Others only makes sense if you think the system will reward you for having made them, or at least we'll try to help you survive when you're giving up your otherwise means of survival.
For example I don't think you can expect even coal miners to give up their jobs without promising that all the other people will bend together and take care of them and support them while they are retrained to do something else.
And the data center people will say that the data is important to business. Hard to say that an individual business is not important when our whole economy runs on business. When you ask business to change, society has to figure out what will substitute in terms of cash flow or in terms of service.
We did that during covid, so I'm confident it can be done, but it wasn't done by private action. It required, at least in the US, something like a trillion dollars in public investment just to make sure that things didn't fall apart when people were asked to change. You can't say to a bunch of people privately that they should just absorb that trillion dollars worth of pain on their own in some mysterious way and stop bothering the government about it.
It's complex. We need to work together. That's actually what government is for, democratic government anyway, when it's not run by plutocrats. It's a way of talking about what we need independent of money. But it's captured lately by money, and that's threatening us all. That's why capitalism has such a bad name these days. It is not acting in the best interest of humanity.
#capitalism #climate #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #environment #sacrifice #coordination #DataCenters #DataCentres #FoodInsecurity #famine #ethics #leather #veganism
-
And while overall I'd like to see cows phased out not just because of methane production, but because of how much land it takes to grow them, how much forest is cut down, etc., the ethics on this are really complex.
It's my opinion that we're about to experience some serious crop shortfalls, and risk of widespread famine. Any deliberate disposal of could-be food seems to me an extraordinarily bad idea, as we are likely to need that food to get through some really harsh times. I'd like to see us prepare better, but it won't surprise me we have to endure some active famine before we understand the need to have better policy.
It's a crude analogy, but some people dislike the sale of leather. I understand why, but I still think even those people should be more careful about saying that such goods should simply be disposed of. Doing so creates a vacuum, let's say for example a need for purses, that because we (thankfully) do not live in an ironclad dictatorship, most of us, will be filled by the creation of more leather. I get not wanting to kill animals to make leather, but once animals are dead, I'm more proponent of doing like indigenous tribes have done, making sure to use every last bit of those dead animals to make their sacrifice worthwhile.
These are not cleanly separated categories, and I don't mean to be simplistic, but I'm trying to say that in my mind, real ethics is not about the mere appearance of being good, but about having the best aggregate effect, even when that involves messy action that requires justification and defense, and that might be good one day and not good another day because the context shifts.
But I do feel for you on the hypocrisy of datacenter resource consumption, though. It does set a bad example, and I can totally see why being asked to make sacrifices when others are not is troublesome.
This is yet another reason why although individual action is important, coordinated central action is critical. Without a coherent theory, it's hard to feel that certain sacrifices are justified, because it seems like everyone against everyone else. Some sacrifices only even makes sense as part of a bigger system. Others only makes sense if you think the system will reward you for having made them, or at least we'll try to help you survive when you're giving up your otherwise means of survival.
For example I don't think you can expect even coal miners to give up their jobs without promising that all the other people will bend together and take care of them and support them while they are retrained to do something else.
And the data center people will say that the data is important to business. Hard to say that an individual business is not important when our whole economy runs on business. When you ask business to change, society has to figure out what will substitute in terms of cash flow or in terms of service.
We did that during covid, so I'm confident it can be done, but it wasn't done by private action. It required, at least in the US, something like a trillion dollars in public investment just to make sure that things didn't fall apart when people were asked to change. You can't say to a bunch of people privately that they should just absorb that trillion dollars worth of pain on their own in some mysterious way and stop bothering the government about it.
It's complex. We need to work together. That's actually what government is for, democratic government anyway, when it's not run by plutocrats. It's a way of talking about what we need independent of money. But it's captured lately by money, and that's threatening us all. That's why capitalism has such a bad name these days. It is not acting in the best interest of humanity.
#capitalism #climate #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #environment #sacrifice #coordination #DataCenters #DataCentres #FoodInsecurity #famine #ethics #leather #veganism
-
And while overall I'd like to see cows phased out not just because of methane production, but because of how much land it takes to grow them, how much forest is cut down, etc., the ethics on this are really complex.
It's my opinion that we're about to experience some serious crop shortfalls, and risk of widespread famine. Any deliberate disposal of could-be food seems to me an extraordinarily bad idea, as we are likely to need that food to get through some really harsh times. I'd like to see us prepare better, but it won't surprise me we have to endure some active famine before we understand the need to have better policy.
It's a crude analogy, but some people dislike the sale of leather. I understand why, but I still think even those people should be more careful about saying that such goods should simply be disposed of. Doing so creates a vacuum, let's say for example a need for purses, that because we (thankfully) do not live in an ironclad dictatorship, most of us, will be filled by the creation of more leather. I get not wanting to kill animals to make leather, but once animals are dead, I'm more proponent of doing like indigenous tribes have done, making sure to use every last bit of those dead animals to make their sacrifice worthwhile.
These are not cleanly separated categories, and I don't mean to be simplistic, but I'm trying to say that in my mind, real ethics is not about the mere appearance of being good, but about having the best aggregate effect, even when that involves messy action that requires justification and defense, and that might be good one day and not good another day because the context shifts.
But I do feel for you on the hypocrisy of datacenter resource consumption, though. It does set a bad example, and I can totally see why being asked to make sacrifices when others are not is troublesome.
This is yet another reason why although individual action is important, coordinated central action is critical. Without a coherent theory, it's hard to feel that certain sacrifices are justified, because it seems like everyone against everyone else. Some sacrifices only even makes sense as part of a bigger system. Others only makes sense if you think the system will reward you for having made them, or at least we'll try to help you survive when you're giving up your otherwise means of survival.
For example I don't think you can expect even coal miners to give up their jobs without promising that all the other people will bend together and take care of them and support them while they are retrained to do something else.
And the data center people will say that the data is important to business. Hard to say that an individual business is not important when our whole economy runs on business. When you ask business to change, society has to figure out what will substitute in terms of cash flow or in terms of service.
We did that during covid, so I'm confident it can be done, but it wasn't done by private action. It required, at least in the US, something like a trillion dollars in public investment just to make sure that things didn't fall apart when people were asked to change. You can't say to a bunch of people privately that they should just absorb that trillion dollars worth of pain on their own in some mysterious way and stop bothering the government about it.
It's complex. We need to work together. That's actually what government is for, democratic government anyway, when it's not run by plutocrats. It's a way of talking about what we need independent of money. But it's captured lately by money, and that's threatening us all. That's why capitalism has such a bad name these days. It is not acting in the best interest of humanity.
#capitalism #climate #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #environment #sacrifice #coordination #DataCenters #DataCentres #FoodInsecurity #famine #ethics #leather #veganism
-
And while overall I'd like to see cows phased out not just because of methane production, but because of how much land it takes to grow them, how much forest is cut down, etc., the ethics on this are really complex.
It's my opinion that we're about to experience some serious crop shortfalls, and risk of widespread famine. Any deliberate disposal of could-be food seems to me an extraordinarily bad idea, as we are likely to need that food to get through some really harsh times. I'd like to see us prepare better, but it won't surprise me we have to endure some active famine before we understand the need to have better policy.
It's a crude analogy, but some people dislike the sale of leather. I understand why, but I still think even those people should be more careful about saying that such goods should simply be disposed of. Doing so creates a vacuum, let's say for example a need for purses, that because we (thankfully) do not live in an ironclad dictatorship, most of us, will be filled by the creation of more leather. I get not wanting to kill animals to make leather, but once animals are dead, I'm more proponent of doing like indigenous tribes have done, making sure to use every last bit of those dead animals to make their sacrifice worthwhile.
These are not cleanly separated categories, and I don't mean to be simplistic, but I'm trying to say that in my mind, real ethics is not about the mere appearance of being good, but about having the best aggregate effect, even when that involves messy action that requires justification and defense, and that might be good one day and not good another day because the context shifts.
But I do feel for you on the hypocrisy of datacenter resource consumption, though. It does set a bad example, and I can totally see why being asked to make sacrifices when others are not is troublesome.
This is yet another reason why although individual action is important, coordinated central action is critical. Without a coherent theory, it's hard to feel that certain sacrifices are justified, because it seems like everyone against everyone else. Some sacrifices only even makes sense as part of a bigger system. Others only makes sense if you think the system will reward you for having made them, or at least we'll try to help you survive when you're giving up your otherwise means of survival.
For example I don't think you can expect even coal miners to give up their jobs without promising that all the other people will bend together and take care of them and support them while they are retrained to do something else.
And the data center people will say that the data is important to business. Hard to say that an individual business is not important when our whole economy runs on business. When you ask business to change, society has to figure out what will substitute in terms of cash flow or in terms of service.
We did that during covid, so I'm confident it can be done, but it wasn't done by private action. It required, at least in the US, something like a trillion dollars in public investment just to make sure that things didn't fall apart when people were asked to change. You can't say to a bunch of people privately that they should just absorb that trillion dollars worth of pain on their own in some mysterious way and stop bothering the government about it.
It's complex. We need to work together. That's actually what government is for, democratic government anyway, when it's not run by plutocrats. It's a way of talking about what we need independent of money. But it's captured lately by money, and that's threatening us all. That's why capitalism has such a bad name these days. It is not acting in the best interest of humanity.
#capitalism #climate #LateStageCapitilism #collapse #environment #sacrifice #coordination #DataCenters #DataCentres #FoodInsecurity #famine #ethics #leather #veganism
-
Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.
This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.
Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.
Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.
#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability
Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.htmlLosing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html -
Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.
This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.
Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.
Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.
#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability
Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.htmlLosing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html -
Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.
This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.
Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.
Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.
#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability
Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.htmlLosing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html -
Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.
This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.
Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.
Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.
#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability
Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.htmlLosing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html -
Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.
This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.
Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.
Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.
#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability
Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.htmlLosing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html -
Does this include the ice cube?
(From an ad in Harper’s magazine, which kind of encapsulates how I’ve been feeling about the magazine lately.) #latestagecapitilism, #peakskymall #harpersmagazine
-
Does this include the ice cube?
(From an ad in Harper’s magazine, which kind of encapsulates how I’ve been feeling about the magazine lately.) #latestagecapitilism, #peakskymall #harpersmagazine
-
Does this include the ice cube?
(From an ad in Harper’s magazine, which kind of encapsulates how I’ve been feeling about the magazine lately.) #latestagecapitilism, #peakskymall #harpersmagazine
-
Can the internet please stop telling me which dead-eyed sociopath has crept past the other dead-eyed sociopaths to be the richest billionaire of the week?
I really don't want to know...
#Capitalism #BillionairesShouldNotExist #LateStageCapitilism #EatTheRich
