[mandmandam]

God it really is heinous.

However, I don't think it's a consequence of the platform, but of work culture. People are like that because it works, and it works because we're deep, deep into a headlong rush toward annihilation in the name of profit.

The people profiting from destroying every public good - peace, pollution-free air and water and soil, housing, healthcare, etc etc - own basically everything. Our politicians, our media, our military. It's been this way for a long time.

Speaking up against this isn't what most people want to hear. It's uncomfortable - and a distraction from short-term survival. There are no easy answers. It's not a message you'll ever hear amplified on corporate media, and it doesn't fit well into a soundbite or tweet.

There's an ocean of subtle and not-so-subtle messaging across every type of media telling you not to look behind the curtain. There are very real consequences for doing so in a way that gets peoples attention.

LinkedIn rewards superficiality over substance because our society does, workplace culture especially so. Professional posturing is a byproduct of a system that commodifies everything: even authenticity, even revolution.

Essentially, our 'hearts and minds' have been hacked, in every possible way.

That said, if you have any good ideas on how a different platform could change that I'd love to hear them.

[mondrian]

Relatively speaking, Instagram and Twitter are far more interesting than LinkedIn. LinkedIn is a special kind of horrible.

[xeyownt]

Twitter is the most terrible platform ever. And it got only worse after Mr. X bought it.

[mandmandam]

Absolutely, which is saying a lot given Twitter's current state.

But most employers won't be looking you up on Instagram or Twitter, unless you're in the type of work where they need to make sure your socials are sufficiently 'clean'.

[konschubert]

> deep into a headlong rush toward annihilation in the name of profit.

Poverty, illness and starvation are the default state of mankind and the fact that almost nobody lives in deep poverty any more is because people get up in the morning and work hard to produce value.

[hkt]

This is simply untrue. Most of the dire circumstances of people around the world today can be traced back to European or American imperialism and increasingly financialised economies.

[konschubert]

Yea and before that, people just chilled all day and the fried chickens just flew into their mouths while the all lived to see their kids grow old.

Got it.

[goodpoint]

Human civilization existed for thousands of years before the concept of work, value and money.

[konschubert]

I guess you don’t consider hunting and gathering work?

And humans were still starving, sick and poor.

[mandmandam]

> Poverty, illness and starvation are the default state of mankind

A most wretched lie. Systems of entrenched inequality and widespread poverty mostly emerged after agriculture and centralized state systems, not during early human history.

That lie serves to shift the blame for people's struggles away from oligarchs and owners and onto their victims. Do you own a company perchance? ... What do your down-stream labourers earn per hour, compared to you?

... Do you think billionaire CEOs and trust-fund nepo babies work harder than people in sweat shops? In mines? Nurses?

Poverty, illness, and starvation are not inherent states. They are outcomes of structural and economic choices.

> the fact that almost nobody lives in deep poverty any more is because people get up in the morning and work hard to produce value.

Another lie, long debunked, labelled "The Protestant Work Ethic Myth". It can be disproved with Nobel economist research [0], World Bank reports [1], or a simple graph [2], not to mention the first few pages of 'Capital'.

Historical evidence and economic research overwhelmingly show that poverty, illness, and starvation are due to structural forces and political choices, and that poverty reduction comes from systemic changes far more than from individual work ethic.

To say otherwise is to blame the victims of terrible crimes of exploitation, while absolving the perpetrators, despite mountains of evidence.

It's fine and good to work, yes. But we have green power, machines, 120 IQ AI, instant global communication... A world where everyone works 20 hours a week with no reduction in Quality of Life for 99% of us is entirely possible, right now; but the current owners of the world would rather see us all burn than move toward it.

0 - https://www.supersummary.com/the-great-escape/summary/

1 - https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview

2 - https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/23410.jpeg

[konschubert]

Look I’m very aware that the spoils of work sometimes get distributed unfairly.

Maybe we could work less and keep the standard of living the same. Or maybe we could work the same but live in a much better standard.

[mandmandam]

> I’m very aware that the spoils of work sometimes get distributed unfairly.

Most company owners are, especially those that involve manufacturing in countries with low wages. What do they do about that though? Do they pay lip service, or do they pay better wages?

Do they go around blaming the poor for not working, or do they put their focus on the systems designed to extract the value of their work?

You've made your position clear, and it's based on some very false ideas about the 'default' state of humanity. I addressed these ideas but you ignored that.

> Maybe we could work less and keep the standard of living the same.

Yes, we could. No 'maybe' about it.

The reason we don't is the dedicated effort of people who like the status quo as it is, and the people they employ across politics, the military and media to keep the situation as inequitable, extractive, and exploitative as possible.

> maybe we could work the same but live in a much better standard.

We could. But again, we don't, and for the exact same reason as above.

[konschubert]

That ad hominem got under my skin admittedly. I’m a company owner only in the most technical sense.

I still have to earn money by going to my day job 9-5. And while some parts come from China, I still assemble my epaper displays myself, on the desk where I work from home during the day.

So I know what it means to have to go to work. And I also know that work can be positive sum and make all sides of the transaction better off.

And again, I’ve never said that the world is FAIR or that I think it should stay unfair. I’m angry every day about how unfair it is!

I’ve just said that work is still a necessary part of this world.

[BlueTemplar]

It wouldn't, it will get enshittified too (see GP's issues with GitHub too), you have to go look beyound platforms.

(Well, I guess Hacker News remains an exception for now, due to a very specific model and circumstances I guess ?)