▲ 1185 ▼ the myth of the good tech giant (lemmy.sdf.org) submitted 1 year ago by pmjv@lemmy.sdf.org to c/unix_surrealism@lemmy.sdf.org 96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 29 points 1 year ago (8 children) Isn't it about clippy and not microsoft permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 43 points 1 year ago* (6 children) Yes, the people who are somehow getting the message that Louis Rossmann was praising Microsoft either didn't watch the video or generally struggle with nuance, or both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago (5 children) It's not irrelevant. Using a corporate mascot as a symbol against another corporate mascot/product isn't going to spread the message Louis intended. You argue the people complaining about it aren't getting his point, but do you really think it will/has survived the word-of-mouth spreading it? The game of telephone that viral trends like this follow is lightning fast and warps messages in extreme ways. And it's not much of a stretch to assume that, if MS churned out a new Clippy chatbot, people would rally around it to spite the others since they have no understanding of why they were doing it in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] DegenerateSupreme@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 year ago* (2 children) My take: if Rossman came out swinging as an anti-corporate revolutionary, his ideas wouldn’t have wide appeal right now, since many people still think the problem is just “bad” mega-corporations. So instead, he’s arguing for less-shitty tech corporations as a first step (symbolized by Clippy, of a less-intrusive software age), rather than “destroy all tech corpos now.” No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. If his video were starkly anti-capitalist, it would not have reached 2.5 million people, and I’d say getting that many people to start thinking about rejecting invasive software is a great step in the right direction, as opposed to ideological purism that would only resonate with those who already agree. The need for these baby steps is frustrating for those who already see the big picture, but a few chats with my coworkers quickly reveal how shockingly little some people have actually thought about the sins of big tech. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 8 points 1 year ago No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. what? when? you could arguably say that about google, but ms was famous for being a major tech ghoul in the late 1990s, early 2000s permalink fedilink source parent [–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIr8Bk8QOHE 3:45 is when he starts talking about his "frustrations with the vocal minority of FOSS cancer" Watching the video, he doesn't seem too found of FOSS or any type of anti-capitalist approach (at one point, he uses the word "communistic" in his descriptions of FOSS) Unfortunately the clippy symbol (as also seen in the post we are commenting on) seems less of a "We should move to an internet we control" and more of a "im nostalgic for when corporations were nicer to us" as if control like this has never been the end goal. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Yeah the "good" thing about the Internet of the nineties and the naughties was the difficulty of actually making any money on it. There wasn't much reason for big corporations to try and take over, and the companies that did have a significant presence on it were mostly run by tech nerds, not finance bros. The web was mostly static sites and the concept of collecting data on users beyond their IP addresses didn't really exist. The companies and the products are different now, because the people in charge now have different ideas about what is possible, reasonable and profitable compared to 20 years ago. Add to that all the changes to the underlying technology and social norms - it's a very different environment. It's true that we can't go back to the way things were, because that would require the context of the entire world to shift. But we can still indicate our desire for products that are less invasive, less exploitative. permalink fedilink source parent [–] cannonship@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago this! i’m about to create another account just to upvote this again permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago It's also not explicitly not about them either. Kinda the problem with symbols is that they're marred by association. This movement is ultimately symbolic and the Clippy people (Microsoft) are at the heart of everything this symbolic gesture goes against. It would be like me trying to make a symbol of how cars are bad by simply showing an old one. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 43 points 1 year ago* (6 children) Yes, the people who are somehow getting the message that Louis Rossmann was praising Microsoft either didn't watch the video or generally struggle with nuance, or both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ech@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago (5 children) It's not irrelevant. Using a corporate mascot as a symbol against another corporate mascot/product isn't going to spread the message Louis intended. You argue the people complaining about it aren't getting his point, but do you really think it will/has survived the word-of-mouth spreading it? The game of telephone that viral trends like this follow is lightning fast and warps messages in extreme ways. And it's not much of a stretch to assume that, if MS churned out a new Clippy chatbot, people would rally around it to spite the others since they have no understanding of why they were doing it in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] DegenerateSupreme@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 year ago* (2 children) My take: if Rossman came out swinging as an anti-corporate revolutionary, his ideas wouldn’t have wide appeal right now, since many people still think the problem is just “bad” mega-corporations. So instead, he’s arguing for less-shitty tech corporations as a first step (symbolized by Clippy, of a less-intrusive software age), rather than “destroy all tech corpos now.” No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. If his video were starkly anti-capitalist, it would not have reached 2.5 million people, and I’d say getting that many people to start thinking about rejecting invasive software is a great step in the right direction, as opposed to ideological purism that would only resonate with those who already agree. The need for these baby steps is frustrating for those who already see the big picture, but a few chats with my coworkers quickly reveal how shockingly little some people have actually thought about the sins of big tech. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 8 points 1 year ago No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. what? when? you could arguably say that about google, but ms was famous for being a major tech ghoul in the late 1990s, early 2000s permalink fedilink source parent [–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIr8Bk8QOHE 3:45 is when he starts talking about his "frustrations with the vocal minority of FOSS cancer" Watching the video, he doesn't seem too found of FOSS or any type of anti-capitalist approach (at one point, he uses the word "communistic" in his descriptions of FOSS) Unfortunately the clippy symbol (as also seen in the post we are commenting on) seems less of a "We should move to an internet we control" and more of a "im nostalgic for when corporations were nicer to us" as if control like this has never been the end goal. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Yeah the "good" thing about the Internet of the nineties and the naughties was the difficulty of actually making any money on it. There wasn't much reason for big corporations to try and take over, and the companies that did have a significant presence on it were mostly run by tech nerds, not finance bros. The web was mostly static sites and the concept of collecting data on users beyond their IP addresses didn't really exist. The companies and the products are different now, because the people in charge now have different ideas about what is possible, reasonable and profitable compared to 20 years ago. Add to that all the changes to the underlying technology and social norms - it's a very different environment. It's true that we can't go back to the way things were, because that would require the context of the entire world to shift. But we can still indicate our desire for products that are less invasive, less exploitative. permalink fedilink source parent [–] cannonship@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago this! i’m about to create another account just to upvote this again permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ech@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago (5 children) It's not irrelevant. Using a corporate mascot as a symbol against another corporate mascot/product isn't going to spread the message Louis intended. You argue the people complaining about it aren't getting his point, but do you really think it will/has survived the word-of-mouth spreading it? The game of telephone that viral trends like this follow is lightning fast and warps messages in extreme ways. And it's not much of a stretch to assume that, if MS churned out a new Clippy chatbot, people would rally around it to spite the others since they have no understanding of why they were doing it in the first place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] DegenerateSupreme@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 year ago* (2 children) My take: if Rossman came out swinging as an anti-corporate revolutionary, his ideas wouldn’t have wide appeal right now, since many people still think the problem is just “bad” mega-corporations. So instead, he’s arguing for less-shitty tech corporations as a first step (symbolized by Clippy, of a less-intrusive software age), rather than “destroy all tech corpos now.” No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. If his video were starkly anti-capitalist, it would not have reached 2.5 million people, and I’d say getting that many people to start thinking about rejecting invasive software is a great step in the right direction, as opposed to ideological purism that would only resonate with those who already agree. The need for these baby steps is frustrating for those who already see the big picture, but a few chats with my coworkers quickly reveal how shockingly little some people have actually thought about the sins of big tech. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 8 points 1 year ago No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. what? when? you could arguably say that about google, but ms was famous for being a major tech ghoul in the late 1990s, early 2000s permalink fedilink source parent [–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIr8Bk8QOHE 3:45 is when he starts talking about his "frustrations with the vocal minority of FOSS cancer" Watching the video, he doesn't seem too found of FOSS or any type of anti-capitalist approach (at one point, he uses the word "communistic" in his descriptions of FOSS) Unfortunately the clippy symbol (as also seen in the post we are commenting on) seems less of a "We should move to an internet we control" and more of a "im nostalgic for when corporations were nicer to us" as if control like this has never been the end goal. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Yeah the "good" thing about the Internet of the nineties and the naughties was the difficulty of actually making any money on it. There wasn't much reason for big corporations to try and take over, and the companies that did have a significant presence on it were mostly run by tech nerds, not finance bros. The web was mostly static sites and the concept of collecting data on users beyond their IP addresses didn't really exist. The companies and the products are different now, because the people in charge now have different ideas about what is possible, reasonable and profitable compared to 20 years ago. Add to that all the changes to the underlying technology and social norms - it's a very different environment. It's true that we can't go back to the way things were, because that would require the context of the entire world to shift. But we can still indicate our desire for products that are less invasive, less exploitative. permalink fedilink source parent [–] cannonship@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago this! i’m about to create another account just to upvote this again permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DegenerateSupreme@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 year ago* (2 children) My take: if Rossman came out swinging as an anti-corporate revolutionary, his ideas wouldn’t have wide appeal right now, since many people still think the problem is just “bad” mega-corporations. So instead, he’s arguing for less-shitty tech corporations as a first step (symbolized by Clippy, of a less-intrusive software age), rather than “destroy all tech corpos now.” No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. If his video were starkly anti-capitalist, it would not have reached 2.5 million people, and I’d say getting that many people to start thinking about rejecting invasive software is a great step in the right direction, as opposed to ideological purism that would only resonate with those who already agree. The need for these baby steps is frustrating for those who already see the big picture, but a few chats with my coworkers quickly reveal how shockingly little some people have actually thought about the sins of big tech. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 8 points 1 year ago No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. what? when? you could arguably say that about google, but ms was famous for being a major tech ghoul in the late 1990s, early 2000s permalink fedilink source parent [–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIr8Bk8QOHE 3:45 is when he starts talking about his "frustrations with the vocal minority of FOSS cancer" Watching the video, he doesn't seem too found of FOSS or any type of anti-capitalist approach (at one point, he uses the word "communistic" in his descriptions of FOSS) Unfortunately the clippy symbol (as also seen in the post we are commenting on) seems less of a "We should move to an internet we control" and more of a "im nostalgic for when corporations were nicer to us" as if control like this has never been the end goal. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 8 points 1 year ago No, Microsoft wasn’t good then, but they were less awful. what? when? you could arguably say that about google, but ms was famous for being a major tech ghoul in the late 1990s, early 2000s permalink fedilink source parent
[–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIr8Bk8QOHE 3:45 is when he starts talking about his "frustrations with the vocal minority of FOSS cancer" Watching the video, he doesn't seem too found of FOSS or any type of anti-capitalist approach (at one point, he uses the word "communistic" in his descriptions of FOSS) Unfortunately the clippy symbol (as also seen in the post we are commenting on) seems less of a "We should move to an internet we control" and more of a "im nostalgic for when corporations were nicer to us" as if control like this has never been the end goal. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Yeah the "good" thing about the Internet of the nineties and the naughties was the difficulty of actually making any money on it. There wasn't much reason for big corporations to try and take over, and the companies that did have a significant presence on it were mostly run by tech nerds, not finance bros. The web was mostly static sites and the concept of collecting data on users beyond their IP addresses didn't really exist. The companies and the products are different now, because the people in charge now have different ideas about what is possible, reasonable and profitable compared to 20 years ago. Add to that all the changes to the underlying technology and social norms - it's a very different environment. It's true that we can't go back to the way things were, because that would require the context of the entire world to shift. But we can still indicate our desire for products that are less invasive, less exploitative. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cannonship@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago this! i’m about to create another account just to upvote this again permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago It's also not explicitly not about them either. Kinda the problem with symbols is that they're marred by association. This movement is ultimately symbolic and the Clippy people (Microsoft) are at the heart of everything this symbolic gesture goes against. It would be like me trying to make a symbol of how cars are bad by simply showing an old one. permalink fedilink source parent