Before people see this and immediately dive into the comments about the WEF, make sure to read the actual essay by Ida Auken. It was never meant to be some dystopian plan but a thought experiment on a gig economy that grew more famous than it should have.
Edit: One thing I've noticed on HN is the dislike of 'Own nothing and be happy' while celebrating gig-economy companies that are essentially empowering this. Startups renting clothing or furniture in SF, at scale, combined with UBI (or benefits common in the part of Europe she's from) is what this article was thinking about.
No planner ever means for their plan to be dystopian. On the contrary, the planner likely has nothing but the best intentions. But intentions don't make their plan non-dystopian.
This is something I always highlight. Grab your standard dystopian sci-fi, check the back history and realize that someone thought that something very much like it was a Grand Idea. Implementation details got in the way, sure, but damn, this system is so fine that hardly anyone could object, and you know what to do with people who object to Utopia.
Ah yes, with the title "Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better." If anything the "You'll own nothing and be happy" is LESS distopian than the essay. I mean, unless you don't read it as a peon completely beaten down into Stockholm syndrome. Plus it's all predicated on "free energy" and other such fantasies, while STILL looking like a nightmare to anyone who reads it.
> Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. No where I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.
She coulda beat people over the head with stuff like this more, but it's pretty clearly not a strictly utopian view there...
Even this, right:
> Environmental problems seem far away, since we only use clean energy and clean production methods.
and the later complaints about how there "used to be"
> lifestyle diseases, climate change, the refugee crisis, environmental degradation, completely congested cities, water pollution, air pollution, social unrest and unemployment
Like, we're clearly not actually solving all those problems by "free transportation of tools instead of buying them", we're just ignoring them.
That is what she claimed after the fact yes. Too bad the social media department of the WEF didn’t realize that and claimed it was a prediction for the year 2030:
It seems quite possible that she meant it as a thought experiment, but that other people, when they heard it, thought yeah that's how it will go down, turning it into a prediction, not her prediction exactly, but a prediction.
> One thing I've noticed on HN is the dislike of 'Own nothing and be happy' while celebrating gig-economy companies that are essentially empowering this.
I suspect that is two different groups expressing their opinions, although there probably is some overlap in the Venn diagram.
I'm not sure that there exist any dystopias (outside of YA novels) that were planned as such. They all seem to be about naivete and creating perverse incentives.
This. Very nearly zero people want to bring about a dystopia. They think they're doing the opposite, even when everyone else is telling them they're making a mistake.
It's part and parcel of how very nearly everybody thinks they're one of "the good guys".
> Auken had previously written in 2014 about a hackathon at the WEF that proposed "FridgeFlix", a startup that would allow users to lease all of their household appliances from a provider that would also service and upgrade these appliances.
This _kind_ of used to be how appliances worked in some countries; many people rented a TV and VCR and so on. At a certain point, the cost structures changed, it was cheaper to buy, and the appliance rental places largely went out of business.
Arguably, this is a bit surprising, because equipment leasing for _companies_ is still big business. I assume someone will try the consumer version again sooner or later.
Washing machines/dryers are commonly rented in the US, especially in places where there isn't a long expected tenancy like apartments near campuses or other young-adult-heavy places. Fridges sometimes, but much less frequently. Save both the cost of the appliance plus the hassle of dealing with taking it cross country if you move far and were otherwise able to fit all your shit in a car.
> "a provider that would also service and upgrade"
The "and upgrade" part is a pure fantasy, though. Never seen one of those give you the good stuff!
> The "and upgrade" part is a pure fantasy, though
Dystopian fantasy, in my view. The trends of the software industry over the last several years have brought me to a place where "upgrading" is now a concept that fills me with dread.
It can't stop at simply just owning things, need to own good quality things, because a lot of things are built with planned obsolescence, which is still a form of rent-seeking. Explicitly renting things is almost preferable because it's more honest, rather than obfuscate the rent-collection behind planned obsolescence.
Good repairability would be another way to combat it! "Buying stuff that lasts forever" and "buying stuff you can fix when it breaks" are both good ways to avoid the cycle of temporary crap
Your point is well taken, but even in a world of planned obsolescence there's a significant different between owning and not owning. If I own the thing, I can do anything I want with it. If I don't, I can't.
Convincing people in cities to not own cars would be the biggest win any of these global orgs can achieve. It is still likely impossible. But, it is an easier sell.
Convincing people to use shared spaces instead of having their own lawns or shared parking instead of a garage is similarly a valuable goal. Both would be big steps in the 'own nothing' direction. It can easily be sold on its own. NYCers would choose an massive central park over a sq-ft each of private garden space any day.
But these people have to try selling the most dystopian framing of such policy decisions, and the baby gets thrown out with the bath water.
I remember a Phillip K Dick story set in the future in which the characters in the story kept having to insert coins into their various household appliances to make them work. Not quite the same, but similar.
> Auken later added an author's note to the story responding to critics, stating that it is not her "utopia or dream of the future", and that she intended for the essay to start discussions about technological development.
Readit News
Edit: One thing I've noticed on HN is the dislike of 'Own nothing and be happy' while celebrating gig-economy companies that are essentially empowering this. Startups renting clothing or furniture in SF, at scale, combined with UBI (or benefits common in the part of Europe she's from) is what this article was thinking about.
She coulda beat people over the head with stuff like this more, but it's pretty clearly not a strictly utopian view there...
Even this, right:
> Environmental problems seem far away, since we only use clean energy and clean production methods.
and the later complaints about how there "used to be"
> lifestyle diseases, climate change, the refugee crisis, environmental degradation, completely congested cities, water pollution, air pollution, social unrest and unemployment
Like, we're clearly not actually solving all those problems by "free transportation of tools instead of buying them", we're just ignoring them.
https://m.facebook.com/worldeconomicforum/videos/8-predictio...
I suspect that is two different groups expressing their opinions, although there probably is some overlap in the Venn diagram.
It's part and parcel of how very nearly everybody thinks they're one of "the good guys".
This _kind_ of used to be how appliances worked in some countries; many people rented a TV and VCR and so on. At a certain point, the cost structures changed, it was cheaper to buy, and the appliance rental places largely went out of business.
Arguably, this is a bit surprising, because equipment leasing for _companies_ is still big business. I assume someone will try the consumer version again sooner or later.
> "a provider that would also service and upgrade"
The "and upgrade" part is a pure fantasy, though. Never seen one of those give you the good stuff!
Dystopian fantasy, in my view. The trends of the software industry over the last several years have brought me to a place where "upgrading" is now a concept that fills me with dread.
I think owning things is basically the only way to fight rent seeking.
But superior to both is owning quality things.
Convincing people in cities to not own cars would be the biggest win any of these global orgs can achieve. It is still likely impossible. But, it is an easier sell.
Convincing people to use shared spaces instead of having their own lawns or shared parking instead of a garage is similarly a valuable goal. Both would be big steps in the 'own nothing' direction. It can easily be sold on its own. NYCers would choose an massive central park over a sq-ft each of private garden space any day.
But these people have to try selling the most dystopian framing of such policy decisions, and the baby gets thrown out with the bath water.
This brought to mind those who hold the opinion that "ideas are worthless".
Mainly because Auken's idea seems quite potent all by itself, without anyone ever really seeing the implementation.
The WEF, G7, G20, etc, are powers' playground. And "mainstream altruism" is almost always terrifying to me as an individual.
I don't consider myself a libertarian by any means, but I think modern society does need to give more credence to the individual.
> Auken later added an author's note to the story responding to critics, stating that it is not her "utopia or dream of the future", and that she intended for the essay to start discussions about technological development.
they aren't demanding it, and it will always be framed as a choice. like how usa health insurance is a choice