@roboneko @ceo_of_monoeye_dating @cinerion @Humpleupagus Cawfee is down so I'm on my alt.

I mean to reply to your link https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/ but I can't find that post for some reason.

---

Amazing article. I am now filled with murderous rage. It's also surprisingly relevant to this thread in its comments about rent seeking.

For example:

> But even amid all the complaining about cars getting stuck in the Internet of Shit, there's still not much discussion of why the car-makers are making their products less attractive, less reliable, less safe, and less resilient by stuffing them full of microchips. Are car execs just the latest generation of rubes who've been suckered by Silicon Valley bullshit and convinced that apps are a magic path to profitability?

I could just as well ask why landowners are letting their prime real estate sit vacant and unused, when housing rent is sky high and even a parking garage would generate a lot of revenue.

Both phenomena (shitty car makers, negligent landowners) seem to depend on a kind of loose cartel. Why don't customers flock to carmakers who don't build touchscreens and spyware into their vehicles? There aren't any. Why don't would-be renters move to a cheaper neighborhood with more housing availability? Their job requires them to be in downtown.

It amazes me that rents can be extracted from *products*, when (theoretically) anybody can make a similar product without the rent extraction. Of course, not everyone can just found their own car company. I wonder what made every car company do the same thing at the same time. Are they all influenced by the same few people? Or do strong trends inherently create a legion of trend-followers and a lack of competition?