butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Not that much has changed has it grit. Keep telling yourself it has.
Luddites and Neo-Luddites.
- Thread starter Delroy Booth
- Start date
grit
an ugly force for good
There has been an interesting movement relating to software development that is very active and been quite successful in essentially making the technologies that power the internet independent of a political bias. The open/free software movement means that the vast majority of internet services are provided using technologies that have no single owner.
A huge part of this movement was contributed by the Apache software foundation which was founded to always provide an open and free alternative to technologies that microsoft were attempting to monopolise. Napster is an interesting subject to bring up as it was the start for what essentially became one of the biggest and disruptive open source technologies, torrents.
grit
an ugly force for good
I agree you haven't change a bit.
Does the state put the same sort of effort into cracking down on self-service checkouts as it does cracking down on internet piracy and torrents?
Tbh your argument regarding open source software has some flaws but it'd take a lot of time and thinking and reading to really take it apart so I'll have a go at a later date. I need sleep.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Which, of course, doesn't adress the reasons why these technologies developed - what they were responses to. That is what the question of neutrality is about - not who the developers formally support ffs. Machines in the manufacturies developed in order to make the same people do the same work but at a faster rate, to increase productivity. Lot so the of the people who introduced these machines were progressive whigs, but their machines were still responses to the question of how to make people work harder and faster within the same space of time. That's what the question of neutrality is about - and having no single owner merely sidesteps it. It doesn't deal with it.
grit
an ugly force for good
Well torrents were a response the network I/O bottlenecks involved in transporting large sets of data between an array of peers.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Then again, i didn't come back crying that i had and then carried on where i left off within a few posts of returning.
grit
an ugly force for good
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Meaningless.
I've added in some more on the post above that you've replied to. It's a bit more substantive on why you have missed the point.
Oh yeah, slightly relevant, there's also a tendency for new less complicated noob-friendly programming languages and other things that would've once been considered highly skilled labour to become deskilled very quickly. Really simplified programming tools and DIY websites and blogs that make the need for expensive labour less necessary. Like the Luddites, it's the highly skilled workers who earn a lot of money who often end up being the first target for de-skilling and technological unemployment. There could be some very interesting developments and political fights over this stuff in the future.
Also other things I'm considering: De-skilling at the point of production is one thing what about de-skilling as a wider concept, at the point of consumption, in other areas of the economy. Planned obsolesence at the point of production, that's an interesting idea I've been toying with but not sure if it fits, planning for certain jobs and skills to become obsolete after a certain amount of time in order to prevent workplace solidarity from emerging. Got loads of little tangents you can go off on from this Luddites starting point it's great.
And here's a song about John Henry, arguably an American Ned Ludd, something that shows how universal these sorts of Ned Ludd folks heroes are
Also other things I'm considering: De-skilling at the point of production is one thing what about de-skilling as a wider concept, at the point of consumption, in other areas of the economy. Planned obsolesence at the point of production, that's an interesting idea I've been toying with but not sure if it fits, planning for certain jobs and skills to become obsolete after a certain amount of time in order to prevent workplace solidarity from emerging. Got loads of little tangents you can go off on from this Luddites starting point it's great.
And here's a song about John Henry, arguably an American Ned Ludd, something that shows how universal these sorts of Ned Ludd folks heroes are
grit
an ugly force for good
Oh nice, is that you attempting to goad me by referring to my recent admission of a period of mental health issues?
grit
an ugly force for good
Absolutely, however all attempts so far have really fallen short of actually deskilling whats required to program. A trend I'm betting (and hoping) will continue for a while! To be honest the idea of making programming skills wide spread is pretty hard to take seriously with the current state of play.
Please don't argue all over my lovely little Luddite thread. I don't do many and i'd be gutted and not chuffed at all if I woke up tomorrow and this thread had 40 pages of bickering all over it. 
grit
an ugly force for good
Please don't argue all over my lovely little Luddite thread. I don't do many and i'd be gutted and not chuffed at all if I woke up tomorrow and this thread had 40 pages of bickering all over it.
I've got a really busy day in work tomorrow, and for everone's sake I'll put butchers on ignore.
It's already a problem actually when it comes to teaching computer science at a high school level, the stuff they're trying to get kids to learn is going to be out of date really quickly and of dubious practical use for them.
grit
an ugly force for good
Dont know about that, you could could teach a teenager Python ( a common , slightly dumbed down language) that they could be employed with. The frameworks and environments used can be fast paced, the languages themselves are relatively a lot slower. With the syntax and data structures remaining essentially unchanged.
So while there might be a small amount of effort to "brush up" on if you have been away for a bit, but nothing that a few pots of coffee and evenings in front of a monitor wont fix.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Deskilling is a recurrent feature of capital accumulation from the start onwards. The collection of social knowledge into as few hands as possible in order to set the rhythm of production and stop others being able to do so is so historically illustrated only a fool would deny it. It's part of its dynamic. Or, if it isn't today, why is it no longer - what's changed?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You know damn well what it is and choose to pretend this is what happened, then immediately bung me on ignore - as a favour to delroy - class. Always shines through.
JimW
支那暗杀团
You can bet your arse if someone came along in the early 1800s and said, look everyone, got this amazing new labour-saving invention so now we'll all be on a four hour day but earning twice as much through this interesting new combination of shearers I've come up with there wouldn't have been the machine-wrecking. But that's not how the social relation plays out. Never understood why this is hard to grasp.
love detective
there's no love too small
There's a fair few places in Capital where Marx talks about how capital itself is frequently a barrier to the introduction and usage of new viable technology.
This relates to instances where although new technology would save on overall labour time of society, it would still 'cost' more than the 'necessary' (i.e. the paid) element of labours' working day. Which means it's not in Capital's interest to introduce and use it, even though it's viable and in society's interest to do so in terms of reducing the amount of 'social labour' required to do a particular thing.
So in a sense, Capital is by far the biggest Luddite (in the commonly mistaken/vulgar sense of the word Luddite that is)
JimW
支那暗杀团
Sort of reminds me of that long-standing urban myth about the oil companies buying up the patents for the water-powered internal combustion engine. Probably not true but shows the understanding there's other interests out front rather than innovation because it's socially (environmentally in this case) better.
That's a great quote I'm nicking that for my writings
Yes this. This is why I want to work planned obsolesence into this somehow, because there are numerous examples of technologies that are deliberately held up because they pose a threat to the interests of the ruling classes of the time. Didn't they invent a light-bulb during the second world war that never popped, but they withdrew it after the war because who's gonna buy lightbulbs if they've got one that never breaks? Likewise there are examples of technology being deliberately sabotaged by capitalists so - think back to the days of the urban legend that windows 95 computers were programmed to start deleting their own system files after 3 years to make you buy windows 98.
Can't be true, because thermodynamics prohibits it.
The story about the oil and tyre companies buying up and closing down the Los Angeles public transport system is, however, true. As documented in Who framed Roger Rabbitt
grit
an ugly force for good
This is real tin foil hat stuff. The software powering banks and insurance companies in particular is usually decades old
It's an urban legend that, although untrue, demonstrate's a point I'm trying to make (and that you really seem to have missed by miles.)
grit
an ugly force for good
The point you are making is simply incorrect in the context of modern IT.
What is the point I'm making? Seeing as you're paying such good attention.
grit
an ugly force for good
You appear to be asserting that the progress of technology is stunted by the ruling classes to ensure that it does not threaten their grip on power. You referenced the deskilling in certain aspects of technology (which has failed time and time again), planned obsolescence and then made an incorrect observation regarding computer science education.
I'm asserting that the progress and direction of technology is by and large shaped by class interests, which means in certain situations technological developments that are harmful to those interests are held back, and technological developments that are in sync with those interests are pushed forward. This isn't controversial stuff by the way. I said nothing to do with their "grip on power" so where you've conjoured that up from I've no idea.
This barely makes any sense. Are you still talking about the Windows 95/98 thing? Because I did know when I put that comment there that the example wasn't a real one, hence why I called it an urban legend, but nonetheless it illustrates the logic of planned obsolescence perfectly. As for the teaching of computer science, I stand by what I said, but I'm not getting into a massive techy derail on the topic. I'd rather discuss the issue of de-skilling in computer programming with someone who has a rudimentary knowledge of economics, which you don't have.
Please go away and find another corner of the internet to amuse yourself with. Your contributions to this thread are just wasting mine and everyone elses time, I have made an effort to answer your questions (far more than you deserved in retrospet) but all your contributions been pretty inane and ill-informed throughout. There are people here who genuinely do understand the politics, history and economics of this kind of stuff in details and I'd rather spend my time engaging with them than you.
grit
an ugly force for good
But crucially, not the technology.
Similar threads
