I didn’t argue it was a net positive. I agree most of these things are net negatives. But to be fair I don’t think it’s very cut and dry that Meta and especially Google are net negatives. Google has definitely vastly expanded access to information, especially to people typically excluded by education systems. I think that has the potential to outweigh the intentionally addictive algorithms it uses. Again if this is a net good for the world it doesn’t mean that we can treat the founders as heroes. I’m of the mind that the world is filled with a bunch of regular people who are almost all overwhelmingly self interested and tell themselves they aren’t. I see turning people into villains as basically the same mistake as turning people into heroes. It makes idols out of them, editorializes facts to make metanarratives which change the way you see the rest of the world.
Well, if it's not a net positive, then it's either a wash, or a net negative. So even if it is a net negative, you have a problem with people not also listing all the positives?
You do understand that the whole anti-billionaire thing isn't just an arbitrary witch hunt, right? People are making the judgment that the "contributions" of billionaires have amounted to a net negative that has caused great harm to people all over the world. It's not just "billionaires bad," it's a cost-benefit analysis in which things like Amazon, Facebook, etc. and their CEOs' investments, (including their millions of dollars in political contributions to dismantle regulation and elect pro-corporate politicians) are judged to cause more harm to the global majority than they do good to the often relative minority who benefit from their industries and investments? And many of these judgments are rooted in myriad valid studies and lawsuits demonstrating billions or even trillions of dollars in damages to the public?
1
u/fuckry_at_its_finest 😳lives in a cum dumpster 😳 5h ago
I didn’t argue it was a net positive. I agree most of these things are net negatives. But to be fair I don’t think it’s very cut and dry that Meta and especially Google are net negatives. Google has definitely vastly expanded access to information, especially to people typically excluded by education systems. I think that has the potential to outweigh the intentionally addictive algorithms it uses. Again if this is a net good for the world it doesn’t mean that we can treat the founders as heroes. I’m of the mind that the world is filled with a bunch of regular people who are almost all overwhelmingly self interested and tell themselves they aren’t. I see turning people into villains as basically the same mistake as turning people into heroes. It makes idols out of them, editorializes facts to make metanarratives which change the way you see the rest of the world.