1. -1
  1.  

  2. 3

    I believe there is an additional reason why companies as the main vehicle for societal change are not the optimal or ultimate form.

    Companies, by definition for-profit, appeal to the impulse to optimize for personal gain. This naturally culminates in inequality towards everyone who are not the company founders/owners. To keep the positive effects of societal change and prevent the negative effects requires strict regulation by a powerful government representing the rest of society.

    It would be much better if there would be a way to effect change with a vehicle that appeals to a different primary human impulse: to improve the lives of people around us. Perhaps the development of UNIX can teach us what this new model could be?

    1. 3

      I think it’s also disingenuous to say that companies are only beholden to their customers. Once a company becomes public they are them beholden to shareholders who are prioritized above customers in many ways.

      I noticed this post doesn’t explicitly mention the role government can play. The author mentions laws, and government executed projects (highways, nuclear bombs), they don’t use the word government once. This is perhaps ideological based on my reading, but is a large gap in the analysis.

      After all this, I don’t believe this is on topic for lobsters.

    2. 2

      “Making inefficient markets more efficient with software” was a good idea, and companies like Uber, Doordash, and Etsy captured a lot of the value.

      This article isn’t about osdev or unix, it’s trashy propaganda written by someone too stupid to realize they are writing propaganda.

      1. 7

        “Making inefficient markets more efficient with software” was a good idea, and companies like Uber, Doordash, and Etsy captured a lot of the value.

        None of this is what those companies do, nor is it why they make money. They used investor money to artificially lower the cost of a service to consumers, in order to lock customers and vendors out of their old relationships and into a walled garden market the company can control and tax.

        1. 1

          I disagree that it’s trashy or propaganda. There is definitely value in these thoughts.

          I do agree that the article is not about osdev or any technical aspect of unix. Perhaps it should be tagged culture?

          1. 0

            There is definitely value in these thoughts.

            Define value, because in this context it means expoiting people while failing to make a profit.