Post #4281578

@toxi@mastodon.thi.ng You said the magic words – personal computing – so I boosted this. I've also been wondering the same thing. But we may never see an email plotting "more centralization" the way we've seen them plotting "make it addictive". Its easier for now to explain the trend as their desire to create immersive, addictive experiences and surveillance. Centralization may be seen as a prerequisite or a side benefit of addictive systems that track people; addicts are easier to stalk since they keep clinging to the surveillance apparatus. Of course, this motive is still political. We should also reflect on how open source has not been a great friend of privacy and autonomy. As early as 2000 in venues like /. I was being lectured that users didn't need an open & feature-stable personal computing platform... the masses would receive Linux freedom in the form of online services and gadgets with Linux and other FOSS buried inside. It happened, but it resulted in the opposite of freedom because it didn't enable non-technical users (tbh most techies didn't like the chaotic Desktop Linux experience, either). In offering no standard or at least defacto UI to users, we offered them zero commitments in the general purpose computing segment (i.e. PCs). Computer science says that commitments are formed as interfaces, and we have denied that the rule also holds for user interfaces. Slathering candy graphics on top of chaos has backfired.