logoalt Hacker News

watwutlast Sunday at 9:21 PM1 replyview on HN

> They act in their own self interest as normal people do and try to conserve their status, employment and lifestyle. Technology tends to act against it - naturally they oppose it.

Why is the underlying assumption that tech must make life of people worst? That the only way tech can advance is by actively creating dystopia, by harming, by disrupting instead of creating better opportunities for people?

Tech changed, from positive to pure anti-human sociopathy. It used to have positive vision and many people in it actually wanted to help actual people. Then the SV pretended to want to create something good while not caring whether they were harming people. Now they stopped even pretending to want to create something good while actively openly trying to cause harm.

For christ sake, look at art. These companies could have been creating better and empowering tools for artists. Instead, they brag about destroying them, about destroying everything art communities like and then blame the victime for not being happy with that.


Replies

simianwordslast Sunday at 9:29 PM

Its an interesting question and I'm biased here. As for the morals of both parties I'll leave you with this: Waymo is cool tech that actually works and saves lives everyday. These are the parties lobbying against Waymo

- Trial Lawyers because they gain from accidents [1]

- Labour Unions [2]

- Transport Unions [3]

Most recently Uber also opposed it but in a different format, but still the same. I wonder what your take on this is? Who is being anti-human here? Who wants to help people? And who are selfish? For me it looks like each one of these parties would rather have less safety in streets than have their jobs taken away.

[1] https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2026/07/tr...

[2] https://teamster.org/2026/03/illinois-teamsters-demand-lawma...

[3] https://www.twu.org/waymo-testing-in-nyc-is-a-danger-to-the-...

show 2 replies