And no matter what upheaval lies ahead, I am certain that the light that illuminates that dust so brightly can never be put away. There are no more gatekeepers, oftentimes for worse, but also for better.

I am not so sanguine. People in power all over the world are seeing the threat to their power from the Internet and working to curtail it. China is probably the most ahead, but I am sure everyone else is hard at work.

The centralization of the Internet makes it a much easier task. If you get Google, Facebook, and Twitter on board, you basically control the flow of information to most of the West.

In the West it probably won’t be overt coercion but more likely via monetary and legal incentives. Immunity or liability from lawsuits for user posted content will be the big carrot and stick that will be used to get these companies to do the governments’ bidding.

I fear that the George Floyd video equivalent 10 years from now will get immediately deleted by ML algorithms as too disturbing and the uploaders automatically banned

I’m in Minneapolis. There are already suspicions that posts post-curfew to Snapchat, Twitter, and Facebook are being blocked or are seeing significant post delays. It’s unconfirmed, but local news is started to dig into it a bit. I have acquaintances who believe they have been censored.

I don't think China is ahead of the west, they just take a slightly different approach. People have a really short memory, they already forgot about Snowden, prism, Room 641A: that shit never stopped.

Please don't get me wrong I'm not trying to equate China and the west, China is a lot worse but strictly looking at the reaction of those in power to the internet... People in power in the west are definitely reacting strongly.

China is more 1984 and the west is more brave new world.

None of the things you listed actually involves suppressing content. The parent author is concerned about suppressing the internet, not spying on it.

Both can be bad, but they're not the same thing. China leads on both.

As usual, overlong and is another apologia -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologia

for large tech monopolies.

These essays are fueled by throwing some facts and nuance around so that we appear to be a thoughtful person but then roughly sums it up with "isn't it great we have cellphones and facebook?"

yeah, i've read a few of these analyses, and while they're mildly interesting, they're not nearly as earth-shatteringly insightful and counter-intuitive as many seem to think they are. it's mostly bog-standard strategic analysis you learn during MBA school, but to ben's credit, well laid out, organized, and appropriately cited.

this particular post seems to marvel at how big tech provides otherwise-sheltered people a lens on the wider world, and by extension, a (rather tiny) mechanism of change. it claims more significance for this mechanism than, you know, masses of people marching on the streets, because that's the vantage point of the author and it's relative importance to him.

edit: i just listened to Funmilola Fagbamila on yesterday's take two [0], and she was incredibly articulate and insightful about the protests and organizing for change: https://www.funmilola.com/

[0] https://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/2020/06/01/20889/

it claims more significance for this mechanism than, you know, masses of people marching on the streets, because that's the vantage point of the author and it's relative importance to him

I mean, the masses of people marching on the streets would very likely not be there but for the widespread sharing of the video.

no, see that's exactly the misestimation afforded by insulation. we've had protests and rebellions recently and for millenia without social media influence. it's just not a required feature of masses of people being angry at injustice.

Sure, and we’ve had race riots in the past too.

But when was the last time we had this level of protest in support of a minority group? The million man march? And that required how much organization in comparison?

No one is arguing that it’s a required feature for masses of people being angry at injustice.

What they’re arguing is that it changes which injustices are visible.

"But when was the last time we had this level of protest in support of a minority group?"

so injustice doesn't matter when it's just minorities, only when some (presumably white) people "support" them?

"What they’re arguing is that it changes which injustices are visible."

...to him. the injustices are painfully apparent to the population affected.

look, all things being equal, it's better that he's now startled out of ignorance by a tragic and now-sensationalized video of someone's death, but sorry, that's not the central mechanism of change here.

Wait, I'm not sure why you are taking a combative tone, as I'm pretty sure we agree -- and if we don't, I'd like to see where.

Perhaps I was unclear.

First: injustice absolutely matters in all cases, not just when it's visible to white people.

But, injustice towards minority groups has, for most of American history, been invisible to and/or ignored by majority groups (obviously not to the minority groups experiencing it, thanks, or even to others). To be clear, this is BAD.

Second: pervasive cellphones (+ cameras) and social media is changing that, making injustices directed at minority groups visible to majority groups, and harder to ignore by those majority groups.

Are you saying that this is not happening, or that it is bad? Or that it's not because of cellphones and social media? What is the central mechanism of change?

(Whether this visibility will ultimately help change anything remains to be seen, for sure. And there are also clearly downsides to social media that make other things worse, too.)

yes, sorry if what i said seemed combative, but i wanted to be very clear and direct about the mechanism of change being the protesters and not the (particularly white) onlookers who support the protesters. that's not to disdain the support (yes to support!) or the changing of sympathies with (social) media (yes to sympathies!), but the effects of those are relatively marginal to change.

my secondary point is that it shouldn't need to take a video to convince (white) people. just listen to the protesters, carefully and earnestly, as well as the investigative journalism around what they say. that should be enough, if folks care enough to not ignore the injustices.

I think you nailed with your comment, I'm even more critical however.

His writing doesn't deliver in a chain of reasoning that you would expect in undergraduate argument papers. Despite their organization and polish the meat of argument is just not there.

As "internet/media analyst" he genuinely seems unaffected by the events of the last 8 years. It's disturing that there are people still out there with this bovine of an outlook. 2020 and techbro discovers redlining and racism were a thing for the last... Most of his essays are just the same way but in different topics. edited -- wrong guy same outlook

Your link is Benedict Evans. The OP is Ben Thompson.

It seems more of a complement to the existing visuals and more story telling oriented approaches being provided via other forms of media and news.

The income disparity graphs personally provided more understanding as to why the issue appears to happen in certain locations.

If it makes it approachable to undergraduate MBA types who feel more comfortable in seeing spreadsheets and data science analysis and understandable to a wider, different audience that doesn't seem like such a bad thing.

That said, I'd be really interested in being pointed to better sources for data science approaches to understanding the issue(s) - in addition to the more narrative based suggestions provided.

it claims more significance for this mechanism than, you know, masses of people marching on the streets

Sure, seeing large marches are great at grabbing attention, but seeing actual video evidence of police brutality is _much_ more persuasive. Now almost everyone has high-def cameras, and the ability to stream live to everyone (so people will see it even if the police take/destroy your phone). I think that makes a big difference, though I'm not arguing that tech alone deserves credit for improving things. Having people in the streets still matters.

"Sure, seeing large marches are great at grabbing attention, but seeing actual video evidence of police brutality is _much_ more persuasive."

again, for you. the people marching didn't need to see the video to be angry and mobilize for change. they were already angry, a long-simmering anger of an even longer and more widely tolerated injustice and oppression. when people protest, we should listen to them, believe them, because protesting is not without its risks and costs. that the video matters so much to you relative to the protesters is exactly the criticsm of perspective leveled here.

"The crescent" is another way of saying "land SE of a big lake".

An alternative plausible explanation is it's a half circle because the town center is on the southern end of the lake.

Way too much being made of multiple sets of data points and pins on a map around a lake, without mentioning density, with a lake.

"While red-lining helped shape segregation in many cities, Minneapolis was pre-emptive about its discrimination; beginning in the 1910s Minneapolis real estate deeds started to include “Covenants” that explicitly excluded African Americans. A team from the University of Minnesota has been researching real estate deeds to uncover these covenants, and created this striking time-lapse of their spread:...

"Racial covenants were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1948, but the effect remains; compare the racial covenant map to the racial dot map Blank referenced above — the blue (which is white people) adheres to the blue of racial covenants:...

"A map of racial covenants closely matches a map of Minneapolis' population

"That red cross, meanwhile, is the location of the homicide of George Floyd, in the decidedly non-blue portion of the map."

I have downvoted your comment, not because there's anything specifically wrong in it, but because I cannot believe focusing on the word "crescent" and disregarding any context could be anything other than an attempt to diminish the discussion.

I'm downvoting it because it is willfully, thoughtfully, and purposefully attempting to argue that there is no racially motivated correlation between these datasets.

There is. Constructing a convoluted worldview in which there isn't, and promulgating it, is racism.

Both peaceful protests and wanton destruction and looting were likely organized on social media.

Interesting that in his mind the looting is the dark side of this uprising.

How about the drones the riot cops use to watch the protesters' every move?

Wasn't it Microsoft and AWS fighting over the facial recognition AI contract that Google finally dropped?

Were the cops organizing by social media? He's making the point that social media can be used for good or bad, what the cops use is a rather orthogonal point.

(To be clear: the things you mention are bad)

I love Ben Thompson's writing and I like how he accurately connects the history of institutional racism to the events of today. I have seen a few articles of this kind, and it seems like in today's America vast majority of people (except a few Trump holdouts) have acknowledged that the historical arc of slavery to segregation to white flight to real estate discrimination has led to where we are.

However, what I don't hear is radical solution to this problem. Even in Obama's medium essay, the solution is deep police and criminal justice reform. Which, while important, is incremental. What we need here is a step change to course correct 400 years of history. And incremental changes do not cut it. Here are some step change suggestions

1)Trillions of dollars of reparations 2) A generous UBI 3) Free healthcare 4) Trillions of investment in schools in poorer neighborhoods 5) A dramatic rise in minimum wage

In pre-COVID world, I would accept a reasonable pushback against this suggestion was "deficit" "debt" etc. But COVID has exposed these pushbacks was hypocritical (puts a stark spotlight on the hypocritical Tea Party movement). We printed trillions of dollars overnight to save small and big businesses, and employees. Why can't we move at that scale ? If we can suddenly print that much money, what is stopping us from massive investments in our most disadvantaged communities to undo 400 years of history ?

Economic parity would go a long way towards solving these problems, I don't think they can happen before white racial resentment is solved. It's interesting that so many working class whites are so willing to vote against their own economic self interest - particular where the possibility of raising the levels of working class blacks is concerned. Last Place Aversion is a very real thing it seems.

Can you expand a little bit on the white racial resentment and what you mean by it ?

Do you think any of those people actually think to themselves "I'm going to vote against my economic self-interest because of Last Place Aversion"?

Maybe they don’t say that but how many farmers who voted for Trump because of his platform about deporting “illegals” are now complaining that they can’t find anyone to work their farms because Americans won’t work the fields at any price?

And they are going to vote for him again?

How many “good Christians” support him even after the recording came out about him “grabbing a woman by the p%%%%”?

Would that imply taxation (to fund such) on recent immigrants from Asia and Europe and Africa, whose ancestors were not involved in the horrors of slavery?

It's not about personal responsibility, or ancestral responsibility. Immigrants in the United States chose to become part of that country, with all the benefits, privileges, and responsibilities that entails.

edit: To make an analogy, if you move into a condo, and its roof needs to be replaced the next year, it's not your fault that the building's reserve fund can't cover the cost, but that doesn't exempt you from paying the special levy.

Ben’s writing on this is so powerful. It should be at the top of HN with a million points. I’m glad to be a supporter of his. As a subscriber I got to hear him read this and it was moving.