This was a useful read, thanks a bunch you for the brief analysis and signpost to the full conversation. It gave language to something I’ve been trying to wrap my head around for a while: the quiet shift from capitalism to something far more insidious, less visible, but deeply feudal in nature. The sections on reasserting democratic control and the hidden class war were particularly powerful, because they don’t just diagnose the problem; they ask the deeper question: What kind of world are we sleepwalking into?
I explored some similar terrain recently, but from a different angle. Less about the economics, more about the performance of legitimacy, how this new class of technofeudal elites market themselves as progressive custodians of the future, while consolidating power in eerily medieval ways. My piece looks at the psychological veneer, the polished language, the token gestures, and the rebranded hierarchies. It’s all very ‘benevolent landlord with a startup logo’.
Where your essay charts the architecture of power, mine pokes at its costume. Together, I think they hint at a bigger picture: one where governance is being gamified, visibility replaces accountability, and democracy is slowly traded in for UX.
This power is manipulation for payment or reward. It's why intelligent countries wall off their internet for the populace. Science and business can continue on the utility though. Clever people have remained under the radar and avoided regulations but these data and the methods used to acquire it and sell it and the power it brings should have been reigned in long ago. However, like guns, they, the datasets, are everywhere and you cannot get them back. Ever. Literally, everyone, everywhere, should log off until laws protecting us are in place or they get our consent for further use and commensurate revenue sharing.
When reading through Technofeudalism I didn’t see a focus on user data but rather a focus on centralized platforms and the rent charged by those platforms for producers that utilize them. Can you point me to where in the book the author addresses the excessive purchase and sale of user data?
This was a useful read, thanks a bunch you for the brief analysis and signpost to the full conversation. It gave language to something I’ve been trying to wrap my head around for a while: the quiet shift from capitalism to something far more insidious, less visible, but deeply feudal in nature. The sections on reasserting democratic control and the hidden class war were particularly powerful, because they don’t just diagnose the problem; they ask the deeper question: What kind of world are we sleepwalking into?
I explored some similar terrain recently, but from a different angle. Less about the economics, more about the performance of legitimacy, how this new class of technofeudal elites market themselves as progressive custodians of the future, while consolidating power in eerily medieval ways. My piece looks at the psychological veneer, the polished language, the token gestures, and the rebranded hierarchies. It’s all very ‘benevolent landlord with a startup logo’.
Where your essay charts the architecture of power, mine pokes at its costume. Together, I think they hint at a bigger picture: one where governance is being gamified, visibility replaces accountability, and democracy is slowly traded in for UX.
For anyone curious, here’s the full piece: https://noisyghost.substack.com/p/a-note-to-the-man-who-misses-the
is there going to be a follow-up post for this elaborating on the points brought up?
This power is manipulation for payment or reward. It's why intelligent countries wall off their internet for the populace. Science and business can continue on the utility though. Clever people have remained under the radar and avoided regulations but these data and the methods used to acquire it and sell it and the power it brings should have been reigned in long ago. However, like guns, they, the datasets, are everywhere and you cannot get them back. Ever. Literally, everyone, everywhere, should log off until laws protecting us are in place or they get our consent for further use and commensurate revenue sharing.
Eh, his points a quantitative, not qualitative. His distinctions are superficial at best
When reading through Technofeudalism I didn’t see a focus on user data but rather a focus on centralized platforms and the rent charged by those platforms for producers that utilize them. Can you point me to where in the book the author addresses the excessive purchase and sale of user data?
Is Varoufakis' analysis somehow related to Zuboff's "The age of surveillance capitalism"? (Worth the read, btw)
Almost…but powerful and necessary analysis.