"The spread of computers and the internet will put jobs in two categories: people who tell computers what to do, and people who are told by computers what to do."

-- Marc Andreessen

I feel like I'm still trying to tell my computer to tell me what to do 😅

@fribbledom I classify things as "people jobs" and "computer jobs" and bad things happen if people do computer jobs or computers do people jobs

@fribbledom that is always how a learner feels. Zen principle of purposelessness as a purpose. There is no greater teacher in life. Feel happy you are where many only dream of.

@fribbledom People who scream at computers for not working worth a fuck.

People who recycle computers, broken or not.

People who scream as computers self-activate and search for people.

Computers that recycle people, living or not.

@fribbledom A perfect capitalist dystopia as Andreessem would love to experience it.

@fribbledom Gunther Dück hat das auch mal auf den Punkt gebracht mit Bezug auf Lernfähigkeit und wie man sich Sachen erarbeiten kann, am Beispiel der Beratung bei der Bank. Er sagte sinngemäß: "man ist entweder Betrachter der Vorderseite eines Bildschirms, oder Betrachter der Rückseite des Bildschirms". Als Betrachter der Rückseite musst Du dem/der an der Vorderseite halt alles glauben.

When I was young my father was annoyed about my computer usage, and told me I was wasting my time. There was no future in being a button-pusher.

@wago We're all button pushers now to varying degrees. But that's not what matters, what matters is what we do with technology.

Andreessen is not wrong because he ignores the power of technology, Andreessen is wrong because he can **only** imagine a world in which some people are educated, literate, and productive, and others are poor obedient serfs.

OFC, computers don't tell people what to do, capitalists use computers to tell people what to do. And Andreessen is one of them.


I see, it's maybe similar to saying the smartest human created mega bombs when a smarter human creates peace?

@wago Technological prowess is one measure of one kind of intelligence, but not useful to measure other vital, valuable, and necessary kinds.


Sign in to participate in the conversation

The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit