If you want to continue doing Horrible Thing X, you must ensure you invest not only in Horrible Thing X but in the most visible opposition to Horrible Thing X. Ideally, that opposition should owe its continued existence to you and to Horrible Thing X.
So, for example, if youβre a surveillance capitalist like Google, you should ensure that Mozilla owes its existence to you and to surveillance capitalism by funding them with roughly half a billion dollars every year. Which, thankfully, Google being the smart and cunning people they are, they are already doing.
#mozilla #google #surveillanceCapitalism #BigTech #honeypot #PR #lobbying #SiliconValley
This entry was edited (5 days ago)
CartyBoston
in reply to Aral Balkan • • •Kees de Kooter ππ
in reply to Aral Balkan • • •Cassandrich
in reply to Kees de Kooter ππ • • •Aral Balkan
in reply to Cassandrich • • •Cassandrich
in reply to Aral Balkan • • •Aral Balkan
in reply to Cassandrich • • •@dalias @kdekooter Makes it no less a lie. In fact, itβs what makes it a honeypot.
If I say I do X (while I exist due to Xβ) and I attract (and have money to pay) people who also care about X, I am effectively taking those people out of the equation. I can ensure they cannot actually harm Xβ.
Moreover, I can suck all the oxygen out of the room for people actually working on X. And can even make them unwelcome on platforms that I sponsor with money from Xβ.
PS. None of this is theoretical. Itβs lived experience.
Aral Balkan
in reply to Aral Balkan • • •(This has so many advantages; it really is money well spent. For one, you can use it to argue that you’re not a monopoly – though, as recent rulings have shown, within limits. Then, you can have that champion of Definitely The Opposite Of Horrible Thing X advocate for self-regulation tactics like Do Not Track that stave off regulation for years, perhaps even a decade if you’re lucky. But that’s not all. You also gain a voice that can lobby softly for lack of regulation at institutions like the EU when your direct lobbying might be more suspect. Not to mention a honeypot that can attract people who actually care about the issues and keep them busy on projects you know won’t make a real difference. But, whatever you do, do train your future heads of public policy better so they don’t beg their friends at conferences they’re both speaking at to “go easier on us”, proclaiming “I don’t know why you’re holding to us such a higher standard, we’re just another Silicon Valley tech company.” Because those qu
... Show more...(This has so many advantages; it really is money well spent. For one, you can use it to argue that youβre not a monopoly β though, as recent rulings have shown, within limits. Then, you can have that champion of Definitely The Opposite Of Horrible Thing X advocate for self-regulation tactics like Do Not Track that stave off regulation for years, perhaps even a decade if youβre lucky. But thatβs not all. You also gain a voice that can lobby softly for lack of regulation at institutions like the EU when your direct lobbying might be more suspect. Not to mention a honeypot that can attract people who actually care about the issues and keep them busy on projects you know wonβt make a real difference. But, whatever you do, do train your future heads of public policy better so they donβt beg their friends at conferences theyβre both speaking at to βgo easier on usβ, proclaiming βI donβt know why youβre holding to us such a higher standard, weβre just another Silicon Valley tech company.β Because those quiet parts should never be spoken out loud. Tsk, tsk.)
#mozilla #BigTech #SiliconValley #corporateCapture #honeypot #regulation #lobbying #institutionalCorruption
ααͺα π¨π¦
in reply to Aral Balkan • • •@mainframed767 How incredibly disingenuous. The real headline: Mozilla sells its morals to the highest bidder.
Mozilla happily takes that money, so letβs not play the whole βGoogle is badβ on this one. Ok?
Aral Balkan
in reply to ααͺα π¨π¦ • • •