[snapcaster]

Is the narrative incorrect though? I feel like the underlying situation is described pretty well by that narrative in most cases. Inequality has increased pretty massively since tech has taken over the economy

Maybe take a crack at it, what is incorrect with the "feudalism" narrative? what is the better way of framing it that you're implying exists?

[bradgessler]

It's both correct and incorrect at the same time and both "sides" are "right".

Let's look at "Inequality has increased pretty massively". One anecdote paints a picture of billionaires getting richer and wages of the working class stagnating. Another narrative paints the opposite picture that tech has brought billions of people out of extreme poverty over the past few decades. Both are true and can be supported by data.

I haven't quite put it into words yet, but I think the key to a narrative that gets people excited about the future is one that makes it very concrete how people will benefit.

I do regularly see gaps that I find unsatisfying, which I think is a better place for me to start so I'll take a crack at that:x

Often I see tech people saying things like, "in the future we'll be doing amazing things that we can't even imagine yet". This scares the hell out of people who don't understand tech. We need more people to understand tech, but I'm not sure how. Education seems like a logical place to start, which gets into very complicated socioeconomic factors.

Another thing I've seen lately is e/acc disparaging opponents as "deccels". Regardless of that being true or not, it's not going to get people excited about the future and instead builds up a group of antagonists. That said, I'm not sure if e/acc is trying to be a diplomatic or political movement, but I think improving the messaging here would be helpful.

I think about this a lot and hope to one day put into words a more satisfying answer to this problem.

[snapcaster]

I see what you mean, I will say that in people's lived day to day experience and happiness relative wealth matters a lot. I'm not sure it's fair to say both are "right" in the sense of you're just talking about different groups of people.

If people are more wealthy on some kind of absolute scale but they can no longer have the financial security to compete and secure a mate they're probably not going to be happy about it regardless of what underlying material net increases have been.

For example, I think if you're a white man in US (probably true for other groups just don't want to speak on things I don't have much experience with) and you aren't into education or computers you're _correct_ to be anti-tech. All it will mean is continuing degradation in your quality of life and feelings of self worth