deleted by creator

This has nothing to do with personal consumption. Consumer politics are not going to do anything about AI

Tell you are not serious without saying it directly: nitpick on tools preferences when there are fascists in power killing people in the streets.

You will have the structure to rework your own cybersecurity stack much earlier than you will attract the interest of any authority. It’s much harder to build an organization that has even a little crumb of impact than it is to secure your communication channels. Focus on the first.

An organization with secure communication and no impact is impossible to fix. An organization with a lot of impact and insecure communication: it’s a few days/months of focused work to fix.

join tech workers coalition or no tech for apartheid. There’s a lot of behind the scene work they do at a global level that doesn’t require any exposure

well, from where else should come the power to interject with the company’s plans if not from forming unions? Like what does it mean to hold a company accountable if you have no leverage? Quitting and making a post on social media about it?

it’s a mostly-American resource for mostly-Americans. I don’t think it tries to be more than that. Also most of the power pushing AI is in the USA. Resisting it from the provinces of the empire with a localist strategy won’t do much.

when*

because these statements are instrumental to building power. They are not a draft of a negotiation proposal. They are a galvanizing message for workers, not a formal demand. Without power, formal demands are pointless. To build power, clarity, concreteness and directness beats idealism, rigour and formalism every day.

I’ve been in tech labor organizing for 8 years at this point. I know written documents matter pretty much nothing for organizing, let alone tech workers organizing. And yes, tech workers need a simple language.

The statement you’ve written is very good to argue on the internet, but it closes any avenue for picking winnable issues in the real world. If the original one sets a clear, achievable goal (canceling a new contract), the one you wrote prevents any kind of realistic demand and sets an unachievable goal for a newly formed union.

If you speak a language workers don’t understand, you increase the cognitive load and lower interest and participation. It’s a trade-off and it’s an ineliminabile part of the game. Being correct and being useful are two different things

It’s labor organizing, not intellectual engagement. The point is to build power in the company, not argue about vocabulary. Words are instrumental, they are not the goal.

The author is Italian teaching in Canada. While it’s true that in the USA democratic structures in the workplace are less common than elsewhere, I think the author is presenting the phenomenon in a rethorical fashion to motivate workers to fight the new forms of Authorian control in the workplace.

are you behind a VPN? Because disconnecting from my VPN it started working again.

as if leftists behaved any better

Puoi parlare in italiano in ogni comunità. Basta che ignori le lamentele dei mangiahamburger

logical fallacies are out of context when used in a normal conversation rather than a scientific debate. It’s just a way to escape and kill the conversation.

happy to be presented with counterevidence

How do you explain to yourself that religious and spiritual people are the drivers of mainstream politics and new political ideologies, while atheists/modernists/disenchanted are pretty much either irrelevant or clinging desperately to their position of vaning power, paralyzed, and often depressed?

did you ever organize a strike in a big company?