> For future reference, whenever a techbro talks about “disrupting an industry,” they mean: “replicating an already existing industry, but subsidizing it heavily with venture capital, and externalizing its costs at the expense of the public or potential workers by circumventing consumer-, worker- or public-protection laws in order to hopefully undercut the competition long enough to bring about regulatory capture.”
@bgcarlisle that was a most excellent blog post. Each of the four points could easily be done as a longer stand-alone, but put them together and it’s an excellent illustration of how society has come to view an entire class of actors.
@clacke Just read the Wikipedia article:
> Up to 2013, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided $71 million to Planned Parenthood and affiliated organizations. In 2014, Melinda Gates has stated that the foundation "has decided not to fund abortion" ...
> No longer funding pro-choice isn't quite the same thing as anti-choice.
I never said they were "anti-choice"
I said that this is an example of the whims of a billionaire determining de facto healthcare policy, which it is
This is excellent.
re: Techbro mention
@bgcarlisle By "disrupting the industry", they mean "disrupting the current market shares in the industry", or, in other words, "successfully entering the industry".
I wonder what would happen if we just did `s/disrupting/successfully entering/g` in all such posts.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!