hi folks,
how about mümüfu ?
thoughtfu respectfu mümüfu ?
Thanks,
Ulrike
> paul van der walt via nettime-l <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> hat am
> 05.04.2025 02:00 CEST geschrieben:
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I just set the moderate-all flag because things seem to have devolved into ad
> hominem flame war territory. Apologies to readers that i didn't do that
> earlier - i hesitated.
>
> Dmitry, regardless of the strength or otherwise of your arguments, your tone
> is very condescending and aggressive. That's not something we want to
> encourage here. Almost every idea can be expressed in a thoughtful and
> respectful manner, and that is what we expect.
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
> > On 4 Apr 2025, at 20:13, Dmytri Kleiner via nettime-l
> > <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> wrote:
> >
> > This reeks of telling me to stfu, just like Byfields comments, while
> > continuing the trend, as DeepSeek pointed out, of misrepresentint the point
> > and sidesteping my core argumenents.
> >
> > I'm ok with a bit of humour on nettime, honestly, as well as critically
> > engaging with modern tech trends, including (*gasp*) LLMs, and trying to
> > post with style (at the risk of being cool, I know)
> >
> > I'm also ok with sticking to the point tho.
> >
> > It's telling that the core points remain unaddressed. No interest in the
> > role of profit, just telling me I'm one of those bad marxists who's mean
> > and crushes liberal dreams.
> >
> > Don't intend into be male, just noting what gets reproach and what doesn't.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> > April 4, 2025 at 12:25 PM, "Anne Roth via nettime-l"
> > <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> I don't think anyone benefits from these types of emails that reek of male
> >> 'I'm cooler than you'.
> >>
> >> You might want to take this off list.
> >>
> >> Anne
> >>
> >> Am 4. April 2025 11:22:54 MESZ schrieb Dmytri Kleiner via nettime-l
> >> <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> April 4, 2025 at 10:44 AM, "Caspar Clemens Mierau via nettime-l"
> >>> <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I was surprised – and to be honest, a bit concerned – by the decision to
> >>>> outsource a response to Byfield’s text to an LLM.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> This is the fully automated luxury communism we where promised. I'll
> >>> respond to concise, substantive arguments, technolgical advancement has
> >>> freed us from the chains of needing to respond to gibberish.
> >>>
> >>> If you disagree with DeepSeek, let me know why. Usefully, it's very
> >>> accurate in this case.
> >>>
> >>> The conclusion presented is:
> >>>
> >>> **Byfield’s critique is gibberish** insofar as it misrepresents the
> >>> text’s purpose and sidesteps its core argument. The text isn’t dismissing
> >>> action – it’s explaining why capitalism *forces* action into channels
> >>> that serve profit.
> >>>
> >>> No lies detected.
> >>>
> >>> I also asked Manus earlier to do a fact check of my original post.
> >>>
> >>> It produced a whole PDF, all of which is fairly well done (ask if you
> >>> want a copy), and included this summary, far supperior to Byfield's human
> >>> effort.
> >>>
> >>> FACT-CHECK: Economic Claims About Billionaires, Capital Destruction, and
> >>> Profit Rates
> >>>
> >>> After thorough research, I find that:
> >>>
> >>> The economic mechanisms described (capital destruction, labor discipline,
> >>> market concentration) are well-supported by evidence. Trump's tariffs
> >>> cost U.S. companies $1.7 trillion in stock value, Tesla's stock declined
> >>> 36-41% in 2025, and X was devalued from $44B to $33B.
> >>>
> >>> Labor market data shows 81% of U.S. workers worried about job loss in
> >>> 2025, with lower-income households experiencing slower wage growth.
> >>> Consumer pessimism about unemployment is at a 10-year high.
> >>>
> >>> Industry consolidation is increasing, with multiple consulting firms
> >>> projecting more M&A activity in 2025, particularly in tech and healthcare
> >>> sectors.
> >>>
> >>> While the economic mechanisms are empirically verifiable, claims about
> >>> intentionality ("to reinflate profit rates") and systemic necessity
> >>> ("capitalism demands sacrifice") represent interpretive frameworks rather
> >>> than empirically verifiable facts.
> >>>
> >>> The text presents a coherent economic analysis from a Marxist
> >>> perspective. The empirical evidence supports many of the economic
> >>> mechanisms described, though the interpretive framework about
> >>> intentionality represents one economic perspective among several possible
> >>> interpretations of the same phenomena.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> >>>
> >>> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> >>>
> >>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> >>>
> >>> # more info: https://www.nettime.org/
> >>>
> >>> # contact: nettime-l-ow...@lists.nettime.org
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> >>
> >> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> >>
> >> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> >>
> >> # more info: https://www.nettime.org/
> >>
> >> # contact: nettime-l-ow...@lists.nettime.org
> >>
> > --
> > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> > # more info: https://www.nettime.org
> > # contact: nettime-l-ow...@lists.nettime.org
>
> --
> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: https://www.nettime.org
> # contact: nettime-l-ow...@lists.nettime.org
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: nettime-l-ow...@lists.nettime.org
