this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
239 points (96.5% liked)

Anti-Corporate Movement

297 readers
3 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:

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 3 months ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/19653721

Thank you, our future 🌐

Source - @[email protected]

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Next time post it as plaintext. Images use more data for no additional information.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

its also a fuck you to everyone with screen readers

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

I just crossposted this. Feel free to help and repost it in plain text or with alt text. This place builds on cooperation. Be the change you want to see.

[–] Omgarm 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Assuming Google isn't already using Lemmy/Mastodon/Kbin data.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It definitely is. But thats not the point. The point is they cant claim the data and profit from it. The reason we are entering another information scarcity era is because companies paywall the content we created.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Actually that's partially why I started putting the creative commons license in my comments. Legally I'm probably not gonna be able to support it in court but for me its more about saying fuck you to the commercialization of everything.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Well, I support people going new ways so more power to you. :)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The difference is they don't control it, it's public, can't really sell data that's public. They also can't shake the platforms into for profit hellscapes like YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc.

Big tech has been controlling the Internet for too long and it's time it stopped.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

can't really sell data that's public.

Google doesn't sell the raw data. The service it "sells" is the indexing of that data amongst other sources of data.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Youβ€˜re missing the point. They can profit off the data like anybody else but they cant make it unavailable to others.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I get the point. The problem is that Google/Alphabet is the only company that you listed that does better with a decentralized Internet instead of walled gardens like Meta and X.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

First, I didnt list anything from what I see. That was someone else.

Second, they didnt list google either but feel free to link it

Third, the original point was that walled gardens are fought with the fediverse which you objected to the point that they cant sell it which is technically correct but misses the point.

Does it make more sense now?