I test drove the first-generation Tesla Roadster. I once lived on Soylent powder shakes for a month. My Twitter account is almost old enough to drive. I wrote a book about the iPhone.

Also, I’m a Luddite. That’s not the contradiction that it might sound like. The original Luddites did not hate technology. Most were skilled machine operators. In the early days of the Industrial Revolution, what they objected to were the specific ways that tech was being used to undermine their status, upend their communities and destroy their livelihoods. So they took sledgehammers to the mechanized looms used to exploit them.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Define freedom of movement?

    Because last I checked, moving a family was expensive and far from free. And last I checked, capitalist’s were still leveraging this lack of financial freedom to exploit workers.

    So, I think the authors use of language was spot on personally.

    • doboprobodyne@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Understood.

      I think we’re talking about two very different things. Apologies, language is a crude instrument. I should have made it more clear. I was referring to the right to freedom of movement. This concept is defined different ways in different countries/bodies of law. There’s a great wikipedia article on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement

      From OP’s text, I inferred that they clearly understood the luddites only smashed the technical kit of employers who the luddites felt exploited their workforce. I’m not certain that that concept of their operation would be grasped by a reader that had not heard about the luddites prior to reading OP’s words.