3 ms·

The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If t

The grandparent comment wasn't about formal replacing informal, it was about bureaucracy replacing dictatorship. I don't think that's always a good thing. If the organization has some urgent goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, some dictatorship is needed to keep bureaucracy in check. But when there's no more urgent goal than well-being of the organization's members, that's when dictatorship fades and the subcommittees begin to sprout.

exo762 8y ago
I wonder if programming languages might be considered a type of a project where comfort of members is of less importance than other goals (mindshare?).
pas 8y ago
Is this really true? Does this work in every kind of war or Moon-race? Control is important, but so is individual initiative. The front line needs the latter the HQ needs the former. That's why "aligning goals" is the important thing, not just rules for power's sake. (That's authorianism of course.)
- JadeNB 8y ago
  To be clear, pas's comment is replying to an earlier version of cousin_it's: > Correction - that's how organizations work when their goal is making members happy. If the organization has an external goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, it needs to be more authoritarian. (EDIT: cousin_it's comment changed again while I was writing this, somewhat closer to the original. Anyway, probably just keep in mind that any now-nonsensical response may be to an earlier version.)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cousin_it 8y ago
  Individual initiative is maximized when people have sole responsibility for their tasks, not when every decision needs to be approved by ten committees. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/
  - pas 8y ago
    But who sets the goal? What's Python's goal? Etc. Maybe it can be as simple as a benevolent-dictator election. Or it can be as complex as direct democracy (voting on PEPs) - but then who can vote becomes the issue, etc.
    - cousin_it 8y ago
      Why election? If you create an organization to pursue some goal, you're the dictator.
      - pas 8y ago
        And the Python project now sees that it wants to transition away from that model. Guido represented Python, was the ideal dictator, but probably there was no good candidate to replace him, hence the complications.
  - JadeNB 8y ago
    > Individual initiative is maximized when people have sole responsibility for their tasks, not when every decision needs to be approved by ten committees. > https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ But there's a big gap between "Option A has worked better than Option B [Spolsky, anecdote]" and even "Option A is always better than Option B", much less "Option A maximises the desired outcome."
- oblio 8y ago
  Every military in the world is hierarchical and the best armies gave people lower in the hierarchy a bit of freedom so that they could improvise. They also educated almost every rank to be able to handle the duties of their immediate superior in case they needed to take that position quickly. Basically control > individual initiative but control + individual initiative >>> absolute control (see Stalinism).
threatofrain 8y ago
All dictatorships have bureaucracies; are they going to rule alone? The question is whether those power structures are visible and explicitly negotiable.

exo762 8y ago

I wonder if programming languages might be considered a type of a project where comfort of members is of less importance than other goals (mindshare?).

pas 8y ago

Is this really true? Does this work in every kind of war or Moon-race? Control is important, but so is individual initiative. The front line needs the latter the HQ needs the former. That's why "aligning goals" is the important thing, not just rules for power's sake. (That's authorianism of course.)

JadeNB 8y ago
To be clear, pas's comment is replying to an earlier version of cousin_it's: > Correction - that's how organizations work when their goal is making members happy. If the organization has an external goal, like winning a war or putting a man on the Moon, it needs to be more authoritarian. (EDIT: cousin_it's comment changed again while I was writing this, somewhat closer to the original. Anyway, probably just keep in mind that any now-nonsensical response may be to an earlier version.)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cousin_it 8y ago
Individual initiative is maximized when people have sole responsibility for their tasks, not when every decision needs to be approved by ten committees. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/
- pas 8y ago
  But who sets the goal? What's Python's goal? Etc. Maybe it can be as simple as a benevolent-dictator election. Or it can be as complex as direct democracy (voting on PEPs) - but then who can vote becomes the issue, etc.
  - cousin_it 8y ago
    Why election? If you create an organization to pursue some goal, you're the dictator.
    - pas 8y ago
      And the Python project now sees that it wants to transition away from that model. Guido represented Python, was the ideal dictator, but probably there was no good candidate to replace him, hence the complications.
- JadeNB 8y ago
  > Individual initiative is maximized when people have sole responsibility for their tasks, not when every decision needs to be approved by ten committees. > https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/03/19/two-stories/ But there's a big gap between "Option A has worked better than Option B [Spolsky, anecdote]" and even "Option A is always better than Option B", much less "Option A maximises the desired outcome."
oblio 8y ago
Every military in the world is hierarchical and the best armies gave people lower in the hierarchy a bit of freedom so that they could improvise. They also educated almost every rank to be able to handle the duties of their immediate superior in case they needed to take that position quickly. Basically control > individual initiative but control + individual initiative >>> absolute control (see Stalinism).

threatofrain 8y ago

All dictatorships have bureaucracies; are they going to rule alone? The question is whether those power structures are visible and explicitly negotiable.