Correct. If you're powerful, you already have several advantages over your competitors unrelated to customer/consumer success (like network effect, owning the path the money flows through etc.)

I literally Ctrl + F-ed 'capitalis' to find a comment that says the iPhone (the poster child of capitalism on the internet) too wasn't really a product of capitalism. Funny that this triggered a bunch of downvotes.

I've been using Qwen3.5-9B, hosted locally for PDF data extraction and it performs pretty well when extracting data from tables and infographics

Yes, but also not necessarily good code(according to some). A lot of people don't buy into the "code should be optimised for reading" stuff.

> It doesn't benefit the consumer or the working class

It should absolutely benefit the blue-collar consumer. Whom it hurts is the moderately rich. (If it works as intended.)

I don't think this makes any sense. If this were true, payday loans would be the lowest interest loans, and ghetto grocery stores would have the lowest prices.

The more money you have, the less desperate you are, the longer you can wait to make a purchase, and the more storage space and capital you have to enable you to get the ideal price/unit bulk rate. I don't think surveillance pricing will affect the moderately rich at all. It will only target the poor.

They will know that you have no bread left in the pantry, no car, two children and no other grocery store near you, and you will pay convenience store prices.

edit: Hell, they'll know that you have $10 left, so you can afford it. They'll know you have a history of taking payday loans when desperate, so they'll raise the price even when you can't afford it, and sell your identity to a payday loan company. The payday loan company will pay a bigger premium for you because they know you have a propensity to default.

Like a rideshare app offering worse pay to drivers who they know are heavily in debt and near their payment deadline? Offering less pay to people who are desperate and have no other options?

> Like a rideshare app offering worse pay to drivers who they know are heavily in debt and near their payment deadline?

No. Labour is a famously idiosyncratic market.

I'm not seeing this example as unrelated.

E.g. If a seller knows I've been searching for flu remedies, I've made a social media post related to the illness. Then I go to the pharmacy and everything related to alleviating those symptoms is more expensive for me.

Put simply, if they know you absolutely need something, they will leverage that information.

A larger more powerful organization has leverage over someone by collecting their data, and uses that to extract value from them.

I can’t quite understand your point. My example was a real reported behavior.

its still surveillance pricing - the payment from the working class here is their labour.

its the same exploitation in both cases

Well they also said they don't feel they're owed that privilege so it's probably not that simple.

It also depends on whether you're providing appropriate compensation for the responsibility that you're offering. I see several cases where managers offer more responsibility for a peanuts' worth of pay hike and then say the same stuff you said.

Yes. At my work place a level bump is almost a doubling of comp and the main criteria is being able to be responsible for projects.

Are there people who could do more and are happy where they are at? Sure. But that’s also not going to work for CEO.

If there was a mainstream way of supporting artists directly and having permanent ownership of music, piracy would be punching down and could possibly be a taboo practice. But as the current order stands, its punching up and fucking the suits more than artists and I really like that.

Bandcamp? Direct sales on their website?

I can understand the piracy argument 25 years ago, when these didn't exist. But at this point, I think there are plenty of ways to directly support artists.

Funny because that is exactly how capitalism works.

If they're not surveilling what apps are being sideloaded, why is the bypass managed by google play services? There are at least 2 better options: - An option to not install the update which would fuck with my device - An option to use the OS layer instead of google play services for this fuckery. i disable gplay services the moment I get my hands on a new phone.

Because they're syncing the override flag to your next device so you don't have to do the waiting window ever again after the first time