Personal review:

A good recap of his previous writings and talks on the subject for the first third, but a bit long. Having paid attention to them for the past year or two, my attention started drifting a few times. I ended up being more impressed with how much he’s managed to condense explaining “enshittification” from 45+ minutes down to around 15.

As soon as he starts building off of that to work towards the core of his message for this talk, I was more-or-less glued to the screen. At first because it’s not exactly clear where he’s going, and there are (what felt like) many specific court rulings to keep up with. Thankfully, once he has laid enough groundwork he gets straight his point. I don’t want to spoil or otherwise lessen the performance he gives, so I won’t directly comment on what his point is in the body of this post - I think the comments are better suited for that anyways.

I found the rest to be pretty compelling. He rides the fine line between directionless discontent and overenthusiastic activist-with-a-plan as he doubles down on his narrative by calling back to the various bits of groundwork he laid before - now that we’re “in” on the idea, what felt like stumbling around in the dark turns into an illuminating path through some of the specifics of the last twenty to forty years of the dynamics of power between tech bosses and their employees. The rousing call to action was also great way to end and wrap it all up.

I’ve become very biased towards Cory Doctorow’s ideas, in part because they line up with a lot of the impressions I have from my few years working as a dev in a big-ish multinational tech company. This talk has done nothing to diminish that bias - on the contrary.

  • AllYourSmurf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 months ago

    This feels like a First Follower problem.

    He’s clearly on the right track, but the first steps have a lot of inertia holding them back. Also, is hard to act as a community when we’re looking for those first few leaders to do something on their own that we as individuals can get behind.

    We need some frameworks for action. I don’t think we know what that looks like yet.

    • Jayjader@jlai.luOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Aside from echoing @SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone and Doctorow’s statements about unionizing, I am aware of a few others who are trying things that I’d describe as complimentary to unions.

      This is a panel titled “Why hasn’t Open Source Won?” where several of the speakers attempt to sketch out a framework wherein a programmer would have more decision over how their code is used: https://youtu.be/k3eycjekIAk . I’ll admit, I’m not the most impressed with where they get to in the limited time they have. Nevertheless, I think it’s a useful angle of consideration to have in the tool belt.

      This is an org/foundation that is trying to walk the walk with regards to governing tech democratically: https://nivenly.org/ I haven’t kept up with any recent developments of theirs.

      • General_Effort@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        “framework wherein a programmer would have more decision over how their code is used” <> “governing tech democratically”

        That’s a bit of a contradiction, no?

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Well for one, change will never come from waiting for “leadership” to take control.

      Change will only ever come from the workers organizing together from the ground up, waiting for someone else to give you the framework will always result in a framework that binds you.