this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
638 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

78543 readers
3128 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So far, every country in the world has had one of two responses to the Trump tariffs. The first one is: "Give Trump everything he asks for (except Greenland) and hope he stops being mad at you." This has been an absolute failure. Give Trump an inch, he'll take a mile. He'll take fucking Greenland. Capitulation is a failure.

But so is the other tactic: retaliatory tariffs. That's what we've done in Canada (like all the best Americans, I'm Canadian). Our top move has been to levy tariffs on the stuff we import from America, making the things we buy more expensive. That's a weird way to punish America! It's like punching yourself in the face as hard as you can, and hoping the downstairs neighbor says "Ouch!"

And it's indiscriminate. Why whack some poor farmer from a state that begins and ends with a vowel with tariffs on his soybeans. That guy never did anything bad to Canada.

But there's a third possible response to tariffs, one that's just sitting there, begging to be tried: what about repealing anticircumvention law?

If you're a technologist or an investor based in a country that's repealed its anticircumvention law, you can go into business making disenshittificatory products that plug into America's defective tech exports, allowing the people who own and use those products to use them in ways that are good for them, even if those uses make the company's shareholders mad.

(page 2) 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] m3t00@piefed.world 6 points 1 week ago

the unshitification privateers. subscription cleanse. oh wait it's just them again

[–] m3t00@piefed.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

like 'dark web' except not public. fuck them lemmings. 'meat with eyes' - lewis black

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Tarrifing in response is effective long-term, i think. Short-term, it's a blow to your economy, but the businesses will reorientate to different pastures, because the US is more expensive.

Edit: ok, maybe that's a bit naive.

[–] alzymologist@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well it's not like there is whole lot of stuff shipped from US to EU. The trick is, digital services sure would not be tarrifed (and if they are, users would still have no choice but to pay).

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

EU members are hooked on tax revenue from US big tech as well. Ireland, for example, is host to Meta offices and datacenters which are huge for revenue and jobs. As an outside observer, this seems to be a major source of tension and debate within that country. Meta just has way too much leverage. It remains to be seen whether the EU as a whole or individual members will have the foresight to seize upon the opportunity to foster an open, alternative tech ecosystem as Doctorow suggests. But, like he says, it will only take one to blow the doors open.

[–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

Think about it. Why does Meta spend the money on that HQ in Ireland? Surely we all know it's not them trying to make a country better by investing in it because they are such kind souls, right? So, yeah Ireland benefits from it, and that's a good thing, but they also have that leverage to say 'thanks for the money, and you can keep profiting here, as long as you're not breaking any of our laws'. I don't know, it's way more complicated than that, but politicians need tk grow some balls.

[–] PrimeMinisterKeyes@leminal.space -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

I've read his treatise and I liked it a lot, but it appears to be full of wishful thinking. "Disenshittification?" Oh my sweet summer child, enshittification not only keeps getting worse, it seems to be accelerating. Also thinking the world would somehow, magically, unite against Trumpism, that there are cracks starting to form in the American digital hegemony... I don't share this optimism at all.

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago

You clearly haven't read it, since he lays out clearly the exact steps that would be required.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›