[foolofat00k]

The thing that people consistently miss with these types of conversations is that any increase in the sophistication of the tech that exists to measure the world gives a relative benefit to corporations over individuals.

This is because those organizations almost always have more resources to dedicate towards making effective use of that information than do individuals.

Very often you as an individual are up against a team of PhDs and engineers whose job it is to enable the corporation to beat you, and the more data they have, the more likely they are to win.

In this respect, there is basically no tech that does not benefit corporations more strongly than it benefits individuals. This is one of the reasons that regulation is important.

[tbrownaw]

> any increase in the sophistication of the tech that exists to measure the world gives a relative benefit to corporations over individuals.

We are far more able to measure the world than we were in the middle ages, or before the civil war, or even during the world wars.

You can see how strong this claimed relative benefit and it's effects are by how the increasing ability to measure the world over that time has led people to become consistently more oppressed as time goes by.

[foolofat00k]

I'm not sure if you disagree with me or not from this comment. Tech isn't the only thing that affects the relative strength of individuals vs corporations (regulation, social pressures, etc).

Also I think it's not unreasonable to argue that corporations are more powerful today than they were during any of the time periods you've listed here.

[CatWChainsaw]

They don't "miss" this fact. It's inconvenient to libertarian la-la land dreams so it's ignored with prejudice, especially here. So many temporarily embarrassed millionaires on HN.