4 ms·
I don't get how mentioning the political angle of the sentiment expressed in the parent post somehow makes it flamey. Both platforms and governments represent
by dejb 16y ago
I don't get how mentioning the political angle of the sentiment expressed in the parent post somehow makes it flamey.
Both platforms and governments represent ways of coordinating the productivity of numerous participants. Although there are differences it seems reasonable to think that lessons learned in one sphere may very well transfer to the other. If you believe that central planning is the most effective method for a platform (both hardware and software) then isn't it reasonable to ask why this wouldn't translate to the wider economy as well?
- natrius 16y agoIt's not a useful comparison. Companies aren't run like governments, where democracy is usually held as the ideal. The comment wasn't useful, but it was inflammatory. I don't think the commenter had bad intentions, but I agree with stanleydrew's judgment.
- theBobMcCormick 16y agoI've actually been wondering a lot lately why isn't democracy held as an ideal for companies? With the amount of power that large corporations have, why do we as a society not hold them to higher standards and require them to be governed more democratically?
- ThomPete 16y agoBecause the nothing would ever be done.
- theBobMcCormick 16y agoThen why do we run countries that way? If "benevolent dictatorship" is good enough for giant multinationals, why isn't it good enough for nations? If it isn't good enough for nations, why is it good enough for multinationals that have as much or more power than many nations?
- wan23 16y agoThey often are. In many large companies shareholders elect board members, and delegate their voting power to them. They effectively run the company democratically. Even though they don't actually manage the day to day affairs of the company, the C-level officials who do can be fired by the board so it's not totally unlike a parliamentary system.