In lieu of our usual line or two introduction here is the runner-up headline (discarded for lack of utility except as clickbait) and some context:
Ms Kaminska Confronts Entropic Techno-Barbarism
...Capitalism is now bent on finally eliminating all autonomy and opposition to itself. Rather than governing through freedom as such, late liberalism harnesses freedom to the uncertainties of its own survival. Shocks and disruption are needed, even celebrated as essential, in order to better mediate, exploit, and direct their impacts. To this extent, as a model for our collective future, the dystopia of permanent emergency has to be resisted.
This challenge has appeared at a time when the possibility of revolution has long passed. We know from the Frankfurt School, there is no natural law of progress. While early capitalism may have battered down Chinese walls, late capitalism is more likely to degenerate into an entropic techno-barbarism. Now faced with such a reality, rather than revolution, the more urgent and practical task is that of resistance, of helping something new emerge by holding back the gathering shitstorm.
The disruption that late capitalism has unleashed presses disproportionately on a contained global precariat. There is no renewal or betterment through disaster — just cumulative loss and abjection. This negative outcome, however, is occluded and suppressed by a positive techno-design culture.....
And from FT Alphaville:Emeritus Professor at the Global Insecurities Centre, University of Bristol November 26, 2018
Don't let GDPR spoil Christmas
The EU's General Data Protection Act (GDPR) was supposed to free us from data servitude.
Everyone, we were told, would be entitled to their data privacy because the act was designed to “Protect and empower all EU citizens' data privacy”.Don't be surprised if I purloin 'data servitude'.
We've been living with the supposed benefits of GDPR since May 2018. But are we any better off?
Turns out, probably no.
After a rush of spammy emails from anyone and everyone you ever gave your email to asking you to opt in to their mailing lists, things have gone quiet. But they have not necessarily got any better. In reality, retailers and service providers still hold all the power in the data relationship.
Problematically, the legislation did little to force institutions into providing alternative versions of their services that aren't based on data harvesting. As it stands, we're politely warned that x business model depends on your data, so please accept the T & Cs to carry on. With full awareness of this disclosure most of us have little choice but to “Accept” if we're to go on with consuming that provider's services. Most of the time there are no other options, since so many online service providers are monopolies — and there's almost nobody out there who doesn't take advantage of data in some way to enhance their business models.
And so, here we are. Something covert has been made overt. And that's about it.
We're still being data-mined — we're now just voluntarily signing up for the Faustian data pact instead.
But it gets worse.
In some cases GDPR is now forcing consumers to give up even more of their personal data than they would have before just to get the same services.
Take the online shopping market as an example.
Most retailers have always offered two types of checkout service for online purchases. Registered or guest, with the data-discrete inclined to use the latter.
Historically, there has never been any discrimination between these two options. Whether you sign out as a guest or signed-in as a registered client, the assumption is you are entitled to all the same consumer protection rights and service qualities offered by the retailer in general.
But with GDPR something has changed. And consumers are only now beginning to cotton on....MUCH MORE
