The reason why the digital debate feels so empty and toothless is simple: framed as a debate over “the digital” rather than “the political” and “the economic,” it’s conducted on terms that are already beneficial to technology companies. Unbeknownst to most of us, the seemingly exceptional nature of commodities in question – from “information” to “networks” to “the Internet” – is coded into our language. It’s this hidden exceptionalism that allows Silicon Valley to dismiss its critics as Luddites who, by opposing “technology,” “information” or “the Internet”-- they don’t do plurals in Silicon Valley, for the nuance risks overwhelming their brains – must also be opposed to “progress.”
iš Morozovo straipsnio.
taiklu, nes ogi kuo ypatinga informacija arba duomenys kaip nemateriali prekė? iš nugaros lendant Polanyi man regis, kad kapitalizmo gimimą atšventėme būtent tada, kai prekėmis tapo trys dalykai: darbo jėga, žemė ir pinigai. kurie, šiaip jau, atitinkamai atitinka žmogų, pievas/laukus/miškus ir monetas/banknotus ne daugiau, nei informacija atitinka popierių ir rašalą.