dwindling7373

I work with engineers, a senior likes to ask the same question to people on their first day (how much does a brick weight that weight 1Kg plus half the brick) and I shit you not these people second guess themselves all the time.

Given, it's probably the pressure of being new to the job and having this guy put you on the spot, but I find this "riddle" really really easy so, maybe, go get that degree?

They laugh at your notion of money but you do you bro, they invite you home to share some of the excess of food that has been harvested by the people that had an honest desire to feed their fellow humans, instead of... getting power through making art?

I mean, same? I was mostly engaging for the sake of other people, you clearly have a very narrow idea of what constitutes progress and what an alternative more balanced society would bring (it's not the extraction of toxic rare metals).

Came to thank me, brought a cake, ceremoniously?

It doesn't sound that bad...

You clearly haven't thought about it and take a lot of things for granted, which is weird considering your stance on the relationship between labor and capital.

Developing new medicines is world-changing innovation, cheaper and more plentiful food is. iPhones are so inconsequentials that most people don't have one.

Let's now talk about Smartphones and your daily experience. You wake up (alarm clock?), you wash yourself (inconsequential), you check heavily manipulated news (I guess it gives a slightly more diverse option than TV or Newspaper, but I'd consider that a credit of the Internet), you go to work (gps were a thing before smartphones, and you get survelliance as a tradeoff, but I guess it's one of the most tangible advantage to be notified live of traffic) or connect with MS teams. Time to eat, I guess you go somewhere, take a walk, or use the smartphone (the internet I guess) to get a limited selection of various cathegory of hyperprocessed slobs. You work and then you stop. But wait, you are always connected so your boss hit you up live and make you work for the big family another 2 hours. You text your buddies to go have a beer later, which you could have 100% done preplanning it or using basic phone. You have fun pulling from your own personal unique life experience or maybe you consume/comment together some idiotic vertical video just like millions are doing at the exact same time everywhere else. You go home.

Such innovation, many plus.

The conversation was clearly more developed here so I resubmitted it :|

Coming back to your point, I'm not being obtuse, a smartphone is not as life changing (for the better) when it comes down to your daily life.

I was born without one, I can relate to the experiences my parents had, and none of it screams "back in the days life was radically different".

Sure you'd go to places to purchase object you can touch and your brain wasn't melted by being exposed from an early age to Tiktok.

Well, it’s always “humans made this”.

I think it’s trivial to argue that without capitalism we would not have iPhones, they are the product of the desire to please a market to make a lot of money.

If the driver was "I want to build something useful for my fellow humans" that wouldn’t likely trend toward an elitist redundant unsustainable device built on the exploitation of cheap labor.

I like the way you framed the request. Too bad the answers are either waaaaaay too long wall of texts, uninformative zingers or bitter jokes.

Here's my attempt.

1. A tool that allows a detached involvement with capitalistic production fueled by the individualistic drive for more wealth.

2. A way for entrepreneurs to chase the myth of permanent growth beyond the limitations of fisical assets.

3. A dangerous all compassing framework for our values that has no positive connection with the material condition of humankind.

The cheapest insect based product, hopefully.

Not really the information structure of this age is a lot tidier than what it used to be 2000 years ago.

I mean EVERYTHING is possible, but I don't think the chances translate from the ones that went from 0 to 2000.

Diminishing returns of some sort?

Ah I see. Well technically yes but that would be easily preventable with a modicum of planning so it's much more likely that it's a deliberate decision.

You get even longer queues?