Another similar book

it’s these things that shape the real internet – the big four tech giants are products of all of these factors.

He’s saying people like Zuckerberg and Jack are distractions.

The idea of talking about this on the internet is funny. Everyone uses it and never wonders if people use it to use them. Or who those people are, and what they want.

Confirming those Asians’ choice of words

It’s also here that we discover the free-wheeling idea of the internet isn’t quite what it seems, that it was always a lot closer to government and the establishment than its image might suggest.

I got that “losing my religion” feeling when I read that. Because I love the internet so much.

The guys who own the cables. Never thought about them. You think it was “Jack” alone who decided to ban Trump? Who decides to ban everyone who “he” bans? “Hey, we don’t like people thinking about us.” This writer calls them the power brokers.

Another type of crypto-overlord – what he calls the money men

Most people’s awareness is so confined they don’t even think of someone like the sole person Jack. They don’t think at all, they just shitpost and mutually-reinforce the worldview the power brokers and money men want them to believe.

I was just shown a cleavage “ad” that distracted me for a second. Probably just a coincidence.

Do you think the “faces” bring these people up when they’re formally questioned like this

It’s the digital revolution, man. Those people don’t control virtually everything you see.

I keep seeing theorists of this subject use this word, and it keeps making me pause

It’s an invisible government. When we browse the web or “chill” on our favorite sites, we feel like the government is nowhere around.

Senators? What about the medium that shapes your interpretation of those senators? Who is the “Senate” of that? Is there a president? Ah, that would be too good to be true. What if there is and you never heard his name before? And yet he and his cabinet have shaped the fundamental nature of your very personality and belief-system?

Agamben is right that their most essential means of control today is digital technology.

When you wonder who controls public opinion on the internet wouldn’t you like to imagine the face of who it actually is rather than one of their puppets? And know something about them, perhaps a good deal about them?

He says they lack the glamor of the techlords, while making even more money than them.

I’m operating on the premise that most people don’t decide what they believe, and that’s not something I expect many to admit. To me it seems extremely obvious. You are downwind from “capitalists” and I can smell them on you.

Another layer

Creation of a concept

the organisations governing the internet

No such thing, right?

Certainly not all of the internet, just most of it. And the most of it they do govern shapes many people who are (or were) not part of the internet they govern. The hideaways, like that Elista forum, are rare.

This is a lofty sentiment

We’re at 1474 right now in Gutenberg time. Martin Luther wasn’t born yet. We don’t know what this is yet.

It took 50-100 years after the invention of the Gutenberg press for books as we know them to emerge. The internet, depending on your definition of internet, is 30-50 years old. If China takes control of it then we probably won’t be able to use the Gutenberg as an anticipatory model anymore.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: