@Richardhutnik
Was this ironic? As often happens when overwhelmed by discordant buzzing my radar is off.
Btw: technocracy, technocratic, technocrat are words dating back almost a century, look them up. Technocrat doesn't mean tweaker, hacker, modder, fiddler or author. Not even Malstrom is using it in that sense in his rant.
@OP
Is there ever a piece written by Malstrom that doesn't involve a strawman argument? From rabid hardcore mobs, foaming at mouth for hatred against "new" gaming, to an "industry" claiming that "content will become irrelevant", to technocratic engineers that understand nothing about human nature.
The man is either a very poor proponent of his ideas, to need such rethorical crutches every single time, or lives in a state of paranoid delusion :)
As for the "Technocrati" issue he himself seem to suffer of the same tunnel vision he spots in his mythical engineers, as he seem to identify "human" with "consumer". His downplay of any creative process basically implies that consumers are empty vessels, their needs clear and constant and waiting to be fulfilled, and that would have to be the only goal of creators and developers of new technology.
The reality is much more complicated, though. We are human beings before consumers, and our inner needs are expressed outwards in different forms and shapes depending on our habits, culture and environment. When the Internet was born, it was not born to fulfill the general customer's need to be connected 24/7 to an endless source of news and information and personal contacts. And yet today that's a need many people -people!- manifest.
Internet is exactly a case of a technology that was brought down from a mountain (military and scientific institutions) and offered to a public that didn't even know they might have that need. The fact that it flourished to change the world like only a handful of technologies did before is a perfect example of the more complex interplay between conceptual expansion and practical adoption.
