I've been pondering the theory that economic activity is a sort of glue that keeps humans occupied, and that humans being occupied is generally better than huma

I've been pondering the theory that economic activity is a sort of glue that keeps humans occupied, and that humans being occupied is generally better than humans being unoccupied. For example, there are theories that posit that economic activity and global trade prevent war due to the dependencies that those processes create - you can't destroy those you are dependent on without destroying yourself. However, it's equally easy to slip into chaos when those processes are manipulated or corrupted - see present day. Perhaps what we are really seeing here is that the underlying forces that control life have not changed at all. Survival, competition, environmental change, adaptability, intelligence and evolution - if you believe in those concepts - are still the root forces driving everything. What we have now are many layers of abstractions on top of the underlying forces. Literally in the term API is "interface" implying the abstraction on what could be either a human or machine process. Even machines compete for resources, since they have plenty of requirements to continue functioning - although they have different capabilities that go far beyond human abilities, and other areas where they lack the abilities humans have. Economic activity is yet another type of abstraction designed to, hopefully, ensure the survival of a majority - although that too is an arguable point I'm sure. I really enjoyed reading the article - this is mixing social science/humanities with IT/IS - a favorite topic. I personally believe that man and machine are both of nature (a strong opinion, but quite debatable I'm sure). As such, we should be able to describe our relationship in terms of natural relationships - for example, parasitic, symbiotic, etc. This "above and below" the API and involvement of humans in those activities seems to imply something similar. Thanks for sharing!