> Instead I took it as a criticism of background processes in our society and
> economy: mass-marketing and lack-of-choice (ineffective but enforced
> product buy-in, in this case).
We are in violent agreement, then :)
I just noticed that I called them "background processes" :-)
You see, computing is a slowly-progressing disease :-)
Wouldn't it be more accurate to call those "Ring 0" processes or some such?