Thoughts on the New Digital Feudalism
How Big Tech and AI are reshaping power structures
The rise of the tech aristocracy
In today’s digital landscape, we’re witnessing the emergence of a new feudal system. Just as medieval lords controlled vast estates, today’s tech giants dominate the artificial intelligence (AI) industry and large language model (LLM) industries. Only companies with massive resources can afford to develop these technologies, while smaller players become modern-day “digital peasants,” working within systems they don’t control.
This imbalance of power extends beyond AI. Look at Google Play, Apple’s App Store or the gig economy platforms like Uber and DoorDash — the pattern is the same. The platforms take significant cuts from creators and workers while controlling the entire ecosystem.
The Open Source paradox
Even the democratizing promise of open source software hasn’t escaped this pattern. While developers initially maintained control through copyright-based licensing, the rise of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) has changed everything. Tech giants can now profit from open source projects without meaningful contribution back to the community. Consider this: some of the most crucial software libraries powering million-dollar tech services were created by unpaid developers working from places like Nebraska, with little financial support.
The dangerous concentration of power
But there’s an even more pressing concern: the unprecedented concentration of decision-making power in the hands of a few tech leaders. Take Elon Musk, for example. His control over Starlink satellites has influenced the course of the war in Ukraine, while his acquisition of Twitter (now X) has reshaped global public discourse, including the US presidential election. Similarly, apps like Tor make crucial decisions about privacy and security that affect billions of people.
When code carries ideology
Technology isn’t neutral — it embeds the beliefs of its creators. Consider these examples:
- Winny the file-sharing software challenged traditional copyright systems in Japan
- Bitcoin’s architecture reflects Satoshi Nakamoto’s distrust of central banks
- Tor’s absolute privacy stance influences global communication patterns
The ideological principles often embedded in technology include:
- Zero censorship
- Complete privacy and anonymity
- Deep skepticism of government and corporate power
The ethical gap
While these principles often come from good intentions, they’re sometimes being implemented without democratic oversight or balanced consideration of the consequences. When tech leaders and developers embed their personal ideologies into widely used platforms, they shape society without accountability.
For example, during the recent economic downturn, many tech companies quickly disbanded their AI ethics teams — revealing how fragile our safeguards against unchecked technological change really are.
Finding balance in a gray world
The reality is that ethical decisions in technology rarely have clear-cut answers. Traditional systems, such as requiring warrants for surveillance, weren’t perfect but they did provide necessary checks and balances. Today’s tech idealists often push for absolute positions — such as total complete privacy or zero regulation — without considering the complex trade-offs involved. On the other hand, moral panics that are not necessarily based on a proper technical understanding often occur.
The way forward
We need a new approach that:
1. Recognizes the enormous impact of technology on society
2. Establishes democratic oversight of major technology decisions
3. Develops “Public-Interest Technologists” who understand both technical and social implications
4. Creates balanced frameworks for addressing competing rights and interests
The future of our digital society shouldn’t be determined by the ideological views of a few powerful technologists. We need inclusive, democratic decision-making about how much compromise is acceptable in different contexts.
Cross-posted from my Substack.
