My probelm is putting too much technology in critical areas where they seemingly arent needed. Its just hard to be optimistic about the future of technology when everything is AI or enshittified garbage. I find it hard to belive this won’t jump on the same trends with forced online connectivity and a built in AI assistant. Theres a certain level of comfert in manual objects that dont need software updates or to even be charged. Sure it might help me (I wear glasses), but I worry about purchasing devices that I fundamentally do not own
OK, but where are they “seemingly not needed”? A lens that can serve people who have different needs for close and long distances IS needed. Which is why we invented bifocals and progressive lenses, which everybody admits are a workaround.
A better prosthesis is a great application for technology. If they can make what they say they’re making that is a definite need and a good application.
You are filling in the blanks about software updates, mobile applications and not owning the device. There is nothing to suggest that is the case here any more than with any other prosthesis that uses a computer. There’s also nothing to say they won’t go that route, but I refuse to start from the position that I don’t want to improve medical technology because I’m too jaded by people making AI juicers with a subscription business model.
I suppose ultimately my problem isnt with the technology but with capitalism. The system where technological growth is second to infinite economic growth. Thats why many people like me fear the advance of technology. Because they do not advance technology for the common good but for the good of capital. Because of that they’re willing to do dangerous things in the namd of profit.
OK, but that seems unrelated to the subject. If you’re going to reject any tech project regardless because it’s been spawned by a capitalist system I’m not going to be super interested in your take about the tech, I’m more interested in your take about capitalism. Otherwise we’re stuck hearing the same speech about how bad tech is over and over again when it’s really not about tech.
To put it another way: get back to me on the tech once you fix capitalism. In the meantime we’re both stuck here and I will continue to exercise some care in separating good developments from bad ones.
Heres the thing, good technological development is possible under capitalism. Thats called open source software, its the only thing that keeps me exited in technology (advancements like Risc-V). I suppose I should have started with this, I dont trust companies and I especially dont trust proprietary hardware. Yes I understand thats ironic since no hardware is truly open source but I do think that we should focus on hardware that’s as open as possible.
OK, we should have hardware that is as open as possible. Do I take it that you have a phone without a Risc CPU and a PC with a GPU of some kind in it?
It’s one thing to have an endgame to strive for, but that doesn’t mean you live like a hermit and dissociate from all technology that is proprietary until an alternative exists.
Otherwise yeah, the other guy is probably right, you make yourself sound like someone who has decided the anger is the point and will work backwards from there to whatever gives them a chance to shake their fist at clouds online.
My probelm is putting too much technology in critical areas where they seemingly arent needed. Its just hard to be optimistic about the future of technology when everything is AI or enshittified garbage. I find it hard to belive this won’t jump on the same trends with forced online connectivity and a built in AI assistant. Theres a certain level of comfert in manual objects that dont need software updates or to even be charged. Sure it might help me (I wear glasses), but I worry about purchasing devices that I fundamentally do not own
OK, but where are they “seemingly not needed”? A lens that can serve people who have different needs for close and long distances IS needed. Which is why we invented bifocals and progressive lenses, which everybody admits are a workaround.
A better prosthesis is a great application for technology. If they can make what they say they’re making that is a definite need and a good application.
You are filling in the blanks about software updates, mobile applications and not owning the device. There is nothing to suggest that is the case here any more than with any other prosthesis that uses a computer. There’s also nothing to say they won’t go that route, but I refuse to start from the position that I don’t want to improve medical technology because I’m too jaded by people making AI juicers with a subscription business model.
I suppose ultimately my problem isnt with the technology but with capitalism. The system where technological growth is second to infinite economic growth. Thats why many people like me fear the advance of technology. Because they do not advance technology for the common good but for the good of capital. Because of that they’re willing to do dangerous things in the namd of profit.
OK, but that seems unrelated to the subject. If you’re going to reject any tech project regardless because it’s been spawned by a capitalist system I’m not going to be super interested in your take about the tech, I’m more interested in your take about capitalism. Otherwise we’re stuck hearing the same speech about how bad tech is over and over again when it’s really not about tech.
To put it another way: get back to me on the tech once you fix capitalism. In the meantime we’re both stuck here and I will continue to exercise some care in separating good developments from bad ones.
Heres the thing, good technological development is possible under capitalism. Thats called open source software, its the only thing that keeps me exited in technology (advancements like Risc-V). I suppose I should have started with this, I dont trust companies and I especially dont trust proprietary hardware. Yes I understand thats ironic since no hardware is truly open source but I do think that we should focus on hardware that’s as open as possible.
OK, we should have hardware that is as open as possible. Do I take it that you have a phone without a Risc CPU and a PC with a GPU of some kind in it?
It’s one thing to have an endgame to strive for, but that doesn’t mean you live like a hermit and dissociate from all technology that is proprietary until an alternative exists.
Otherwise yeah, the other guy is probably right, you make yourself sound like someone who has decided the anger is the point and will work backwards from there to whatever gives them a chance to shake their fist at clouds online.
Ultimately your problem is you don’t like new tech and want to be angry at it so you try to make up a reason.
Latency didn’t work because they’re not VR glasses? Let’s blame capitalism.
As if people who make regular pairs of glasses aren’t getting paid already and are totally doing it for the good of all.