> Apple’s controversy is nothing but a mirror that has reflected what we have become, and it’s time to change.
Of course it's a bit of a hyperbole, but I can't say I disagree.
Of course it's a bit of a hyperbole, but I can't say I disagree.
Like, these corporations don't produce all of this stuff just for the sake of it - there are consumers like "us" buying it at the other end. Us again meaning people in countries and in demographics where you can afford it, I don't blame someone in a poor country burning tyres for heat - their environmental damage over a full year is probably less than mine over a month.
And while personally I don't own a car, don't fly, work on a 5 year old desktop computer, old phone, eat meat or fish less than twice a week... I often wonder:
How come I earn 2-3 times modal wages writing C++ software to stream video over internet? Sure lots of people watch Netflix or Youtube for leisure, but how come society value my labour so much higher than someone working in construction, education, retail, food? Why don't I pay more taxes? Should software be eating the world?
Because the people you work for make shitloads of money delivering content and their employees expect to be paid accordingly? Because Twitter who delivers short messages on the Internet sold for 44b, while Westinghouse who makes nuclear reactors sold for $7.9b? Seems like there's more demand for a propaganda vehicle than for a power plant.
So please help me understand why the people I work for are making shitloads of money? Why is Twitter worth $ 44b?
Asking why here is mostly meant rhetorically. What I'm really after is figuring out if there's a way to restructure society such that monetary rewards are directed towards what's valuable to society. IMO, streaming video and social networks aren't that.