Pluralistic: Antiusurpation and the road to disenshittification (07 Nov 2024) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
pluralistic.net

“We need policies that keep middlemen weak.”

stood out to me.

Many of my influences have railed against middle men, and I think that’s unfair. I’ve worked with plenty of middle men that made everyone then better off.

I’ve also had the unique displeasure that at least half of all links shared with me in recent years have been to a site called “Instagram”, where I am unable to access the content without an account (which I refuse to make because Zuckerberg is a creepy stalker.)

I find it deeply weird that such a locked ecosystem now controls so much attention.

I find Cory Doctorow’s thoughts on the problem and potential solutions to be both hopeful and cathartic.

  • orclev@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    5 days ago

    We also need competition and for decades now the offices that were supposed to safe guard us from monopolies have been green lighting again and again mergers and acquisitions that result in only one or two dominant players in every market. There should be a blanket rule that if there are less than 10 companies (of somewhat similar scale) operating in some market none of them are allowed to merge or acquire each other.

    • MajorHavoc@programming.devOPEnglish
      3·
      4 days ago

      Yeah. We desperately need anti-trust laws to actually be enforced. I think we’ve proven that nuanced and thoughtful rules don’t cut it, so I’m in favor of some deeply restrictive new rules that are impossible to mis-interpret.

      I also think we should create laws with immediate financial incentives for breaking up monopolies.

      I’m essence, we need a law that I, as a random citizen, can just climb into any parked Amazon truck and take it home.

      I think Amazon would be a lot more interested in splitting the company along appropriately legal lines if the alternative was the owned capital just getting declared public property on a random Tuesday next year.

      • orclev@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        So I was spitballing some ideas around this a while back, although I was more focused on income inequality at the time. I think the best idea I came up with was something like a progressive taxation system where a company’s taxes were determined by the highest paid employee (including the value of benefits and things like stock grants) minus the lowest paid employee, divided by the company head count. If executives want to keep bringing in eye watering salaries they either need to pay all their employees significantly more, or hire a hell of a lot more of them at current rates. There’s probably some flaws and things that could be tweaked there, but I think it’s a start.