Post

This is true, but the larger scam pattern (web3/metaverse/crypto/etc) is what many of us are trying to give voice to — folks have to recognize that letting those bad actors define "tech" is just like media letting bad actors frame every other "debate". It's losing before we even start.

Tom Scocca@tomscocca.bsky.social

Trying to think of any previous technology that needed this many people out there telling everyone that they're wrong about how it stinks and it is very good and helpfully actually

143 reposts805 likes

is it true? there are millions of people who get real value out of LLMs and these takes basically hand-wave that away with platitudes about how they sometimes hallucinate. i understand VC grifters are proselytizing the heck out of this but the modal LLM user doesn’t actually care who else uses it!

The only solution is "use least harmful option" vs tech is evil. Why? Practical. Example Bsky vs Twitter/Facebook, Toyota vs Tesla, etc, etc.

The tech tycoons are trying (and succeeding) in baiting people into knee-jerk rejection of each of these new projects because it lets them get entrenched *faster*. They end up getting regulated into a fascist oligopoly, and eliminating any public or independent alternative technologies.

They don't go away! People yelling at the folks doing it, saying "you dummies, that is evil, you are bad": IT DIDN'T FUCKING WORK. It didn't stop the social networks. It didn't stop the cryptocurrencies. It didn't stop the scammers! Trump has a memecoin RIGHT NOW. Your technique is not effective.

And I am telling everyone, there is an alternative approach that might work, but it requires learning, and engaging with people who actually understand these technologies. Or, everyone can just self-righteously yell the same platitudes and fail to stop the harms and the fascists will win. Again.

You're here on Bluesky because you saw what was broken on Twitter. If someone had simply said to you "DO NOT BE ON SOCIAL MEDIA" as their answer to Twitter being taken over by fascists, would you have said "that's a reasonable alternative"? Think about your actual answer to this question.

Yeah, but these technologies suck shit and I legitimately hate interacting with them at all. Even if it were the nicest people in the world trying to get me to use them, I'd STILL be irritated by them. They're obnoxious, and they create more problems than they solve.

I mean, the other thing to consider is that none of us have billions of dollars in dry powder looking for the next snake oil to invest in. Even if we adored these products, no one is listening to us in the first place.

Actually the yelling is effective for making sure people on *our side* don't engage with crypto and thereby fall prey to scams and lose our money and livelihoods. The best move for crypto is to not engage with it. It is a universal maxim that a fool and his money are easily parted.

I mean... I can *kind* of grant this? In general. But that's absolutely not what most of this shit is doing. It's people scolding the already-converted. Like, there is not one person in my mentions who thinks I'm running a memecoin scam. They're just choir-preaching to make themselves feel good.

Self-righteousness is the coin of this realm. Being right feels good, and the only thing better than feeling right is being the 2000th goober to pile on with some lazy derivative shit. Community for the righteously indigent. These folks are pissed about other people finding a tool helpful 🫠

so from the outside, it looks like this is a battle that's already been lost. If you think it's a winnable one, and would like to ask for *help* in allowing "tech" to mean people who aren't actively trying to destroy society, then ask for help, don't criticize us for being pissed off at the scammers

1- Invest in ESG to offset cost 2 - Get your effing data cleaned up and ready for use 3 - Build personal, team, company and government level governance through standards and thoughtful leadership Share and learn. It’s the same work from when PC’s, internet, mobile and cloud all “went-to-market”.

It’s actually not very true. If you take the position on the right, they’ve been dismissing solar saying it’s not reliable, doesn’t carry „base load“ etc while the other side has had to advertise for it all the time yet we know now it’s amazing technology.

The base argument is actually very silly, claiming if something was objectively good you wouldn’t have to advertise it. Just look at how people had to fight for women suffrage or to end apartheid.

That’s true but doesn’t make it a better argument. I think it is a good argument to say they have to push the technology bc they’re so deeply invested in this tech bro fever dream that there’s no turning back for them. Heck, some of them went as far as aiding a hostile takeover of the government…