by
Jaron Lanier
233
The Project
0
terms
3
notes
234
We do have rules in place to charge commercial concerns for using the public airwaves. Maybe that model could be extended to information flows in general. The argument would be that every citizen contributes to the information space whether they want to or not. Everyone is measured and tracked in the network age. So why not have government collect compensation for the use of that value in order to fund social welfare?
his argument against this (on the next page) is that we should instead go "all the way" and treat information as genuinely valuable which, I would argue, is NOT going all the way
he also characterises such an endeavour (of granting licenses) as potentially limiting new ventures (putting a "political choke hold on expression") which is ofc bad
my response to this is: does he not realise that governments (or at least all governments with sovereign money) can print their own money or ...?
We do have rules in place to charge commercial concerns for using the public airwaves. Maybe that model could be extended to information flows in general. The argument would be that every citizen contributes to the information space whether they want to or not. Everyone is measured and tracked in the network age. So why not have government collect compensation for the use of that value in order to fund social welfare?
his argument against this (on the next page) is that we should instead go "all the way" and treat information as genuinely valuable which, I would argue, is NOT going all the way
he also characterises such an endeavour (of granting licenses) as potentially limiting new ventures (putting a "political choke hold on expression") which is ofc bad
my response to this is: does he not realise that governments (or at least all governments with sovereign money) can print their own money or ...?
235
A humanist approach to future digital economies might, on first sniff, smell redistributionist, but it is nothing of the kind. Some people would contribute and earn more than others. The point is not to create a fake contest where everybody is guaranteed to win, but rather to be honest about who contributed to successes, so as not to foster fake incentives.
in trying to water down his argument for conservatives, he strips it of any true audacity and makes it pointless. why have a contest that controls distribution at all?????
A humanist approach to future digital economies might, on first sniff, smell redistributionist, but it is nothing of the kind. Some people would contribute and earn more than others. The point is not to create a fake contest where everybody is guaranteed to win, but rather to be honest about who contributed to successes, so as not to foster fake incentives.
in trying to water down his argument for conservatives, he strips it of any true audacity and makes it pointless. why have a contest that controls distribution at all?????
237
[...] "Your arch has been replicated fifty-eight times around the world. Check out this giant version from a beach in Rio." Through the mixed-reality glasses, you and your friends find yourselves sharing a beach with revelers in Rio.
Wow, a nice day's earnings for you. "Seagull, that casino nearby has an excellent restaurant, doesn't it? Let's splurge." You call out to your friends, "Who's hungry?"
his stupid seagull on a beach fantasy. is this supposed to be utopia???? this is disgusting, i have no words
[...] "Your arch has been replicated fifty-eight times around the world. Check out this giant version from a beach in Rio." Through the mixed-reality glasses, you and your friends find yourselves sharing a beach with revelers in Rio.
Wow, a nice day's earnings for you. "Seagull, that casino nearby has an excellent restaurant, doesn't it? Let's splurge." You call out to your friends, "Who's hungry?"
his stupid seagull on a beach fantasy. is this supposed to be utopia???? this is disgusting, i have no words