4 ms·
Sounds like engineers (and people in general) are good at optimizing locally (achieving what's good for me) and stink at optimizing globally (achieving what's g
by domador 8y ago
Sounds like engineers (and people in general) are good at optimizing locally (achieving what's good for me) and stink at optimizing globally (achieving what's good for everyone in society).
- EdgarVerona 8y agoAye, I definitely think it's a human thing. I apologize, because I'm going to use the word "addicting" in a non-scientific sense, but the normal use of the word that best conveys the situation in my opinion. Solving problems is addictive. Getting the rush of a job well done - regardless of what that job is - is addictive. Getting recognition is addictive. Having a comfortable salary is addictive. It's so easy for me to slip into those addictions and not pay attention to the bigger picture. And I feel like I'm not the only one suffering from this problem. In fact, I can see it empirically in the people who have worked at the aforementioned jobs with me. There needs to be a balance. A person doesn't need to be outright altruistic, but focusing exclusively on local optimization allows for a sort of hedonistic behavior set that can justify - and has historically justified - participation as a cog in larger and harmful systems.
- Nasrudith 8y agoNot to be a smartass but what group of people are actually good at optimizing globally? Tragedy of the commons and sociopathic exploiters make such a thing seem impossible to do - the best you can do is leave something with a positive legacy which is very different from optimizing and far more prone to backfire than local optimization. By definition less is known about the global - let alone the chaotic divergence over time which makes weather models diverge quickly even with massive processing power