Computers and Capital are somehow intertwined since the beginning…
There’s also echoes in culture/art - cyberpunk’s hypercorporations.
Maybe the “homogenization” inherent to data processing matches commodification really well?
Ultimately, capital/markets are a cybernetic phenomenon - so it makes sense that both the implicit ideology as well as the aesthethics tend to resonate.
making something explicit is frequently a sign that *something is broken and needs [to be] repaired*
so if the money brain and the social brain aren't well integrated, transactionality can feel like a siren going off 24/7
Above quote was in the context of money feeling “wrong” because of the explicit transactionality.
Is that why 99% of computer interfaces feel positively awkward and dorky?
- e.g. I shouldn’t need to put a label on a person to mark them as my “Friend” - doing so IRL would be positively psychotic
- Also a reason small-scale systems typically do not possess much in the way of security (besides the inconvenience of setting it up, of course) or explicit hierarchy per se
Laws of scale - if you can compute something once, you can typically compute it an infinite amount of times.
- Most “computer things” (programs, systems…) have an impersonal quality because of this
- There’s an incredibly small step from personal (“sewing a button on and fixing my pants”) to industrial (“constructing a sewing factory that can serve hundreds of people”)
- Is this the consequence or reason for the lack of “end-user programming”?
money is flesh