379
Benefit of the hindsight
(sub.wetshaving.social)
cross-posted from: https://sub.wetshaving.social/post/2511739
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
379 points (97.5% liked)
Anti-Corporate Movement
868 readers
1 users here now
This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.
Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.
Current topics this includes but is not limited to:
- Meta's entry into the fediverse
- Game companies putting gambling mechanics in childrens games
- Embracer groups buyout and closing of smaller game studios
- IP trolls destroying small companies and keeping progress back for profit
Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.
Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.
But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.
But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.
But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.
But then they will "live" in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
At least the current usage of NFTs is a twist of the pyramid scheme.
A traditional pyramid scheme works like this:
All those individuals are lured into the scheme under the promise of easy money. But each must convince at least two others to join, otherwise they get no profit. So the scheme evolves exponentially, until there's no muppet willing to join; so you have a lot of people who are basically giving money to a few ones. And Alice in special - who started the scheme - gets money for absolutely nothing.
Now look at the NFTs. There's artificial scarcity behind "owning" the picture. You can download the picture like anyone else could (would you download a car? Fuck yeah, I would), but only one person will show as the "owner" of the picture in the NFT ledge.
Why do people buy this shit? For the artistic expression of mix-and-match pictures of bored apes? Not really - because they hope to resell it for a more expensive price. So instead of relying on more muppets joining the scheme, the NFT scheme relies on each muppet paying more and more for the "art". Like this:
Alice got 50 bucks. Bob, 10 bucks. Charlie, 15 bucks. They all come from Dan, who's now 75 bucks poorer.
Now, here's the question: is there any legitimate usage of NFTs? I don't know; but based on what I've read, every single other potential use can be addressed in an easier way by already existing technology. For example, the other comment chain is discussing ticket scalpers.
Note that both things can be combined, either as co-requirements or options. And while they don't completely prevent scalping, they already limit its scale.
You're describing a classic mlm scheme and also the new late stage capitalism with "digital" products. Both are essentially, lets go rob someone.
Yup, pretty much - MLM is a specific implementation of the pyramid scheme. The key difference between MLM and the NFT scheme is that one expects more suckers; another, bigger suckers.
Just the sort of "get rich fast" scheme you'd expect in an economical system that assumes the impossible - infinite expansion and growth.
Good point thanks.
Now lets talk about the fact that capitalism too is just a pyramid scheme. :)
"But if you WoRk HaRd for a business you'll eventually afford your own business! Then you'll have many people to WoRk HaRd for you! You'll ger rich!"
Funnier (or sadder) thing is that the way they defend capitalism also sounds like people selling those schemes.
Exactly. Its just so silly to see people legit fight people who criticize it.