11 ms·

I made/make no claim about the relative moral merits of capitalism or a hierarchal society at all. However you only need to look closely at your stated claim to

I made/make no claim about the relative moral merits of capitalism or a hierarchal society at all. However you only need to look closely at your stated claim to see why Conway's Law is relevant here: your claim about "technology" rely on our concept of money / funding staying the same. Given that our concept of money has been evolving non-stop over the past centuries it seems unlikely that it won't further evolve. I'm not saying that your claim is wrong, rather the opposite I believe it's holds true in the present. Computer Information Systems are reliant on larger economic forces. In many cases centralized systems are not better on a purely technical basis, but rather are better at attracting capital. However there are undoubtably systems of human organization and resource management that would change the fundamentals assumptions behind this.

jasode 7y ago
>I made/make no claim about the relative moral merits of capitalism Sorry for the misunderstanding. My reference to capitalists was a general point and not related to anything specific you wrote. Others in the thread mention capitalists so I just added it to my reply for color. >However there are undoubtably systems of human organization and resource management that would change the fundamentals assumptions behind this. I appreciate you bringing up Conway's Law as an explanation but I'm not fully convinced. I think there's an even more fundamental force than any artificial human organization such as Conway: if a bunch of humans don't want to do something , it creates an opening in the market for another group to do it instead. If that "something" is information technology related, it tends to create centralization. A bunch of us don't want to set up a personal git server (for whatever reasons), and therefore, it creates an opening in the marketplace for Github to exist. At this primal level of desires, I don't think we have to bring in Conway's Law.
- dmwallin 7y ago
  No worries! I appreciated the opportunity to clarify my thoughts. Yeah, it doesn't help that my theory is a tough one to validate, since by definition the conditions don't exist to experimentally test it, so you are left with mostly thought experiments. One thing I think is in favor of your argument, decentralized technologies do seem inherently harder to reason about.

jasode 7y ago

>I made/make no claim about the relative moral merits of capitalism Sorry for the misunderstanding. My reference to capitalists was a general point and not related to anything specific you wrote. Others in the thread mention capitalists so I just added it to my reply for color. >However there are undoubtably systems of human organization and resource management that would change the fundamentals assumptions behind this. I appreciate you bringing up Conway's Law as an explanation but I'm not fully convinced. I think there's an even more fundamental force than any artificial human organization such as Conway: if a bunch of humans don't want to do something , it creates an opening in the market for another group to do it instead. If that "something" is information technology related, it tends to create centralization. A bunch of us don't want to set up a personal git server (for whatever reasons), and therefore, it creates an opening in the marketplace for Github to exist. At this primal level of desires, I don't think we have to bring in Conway's Law.

dmwallin 7y ago
No worries! I appreciated the opportunity to clarify my thoughts. Yeah, it doesn't help that my theory is a tough one to validate, since by definition the conditions don't exist to experimentally test it, so you are left with mostly thought experiments. One thing I think is in favor of your argument, decentralized technologies do seem inherently harder to reason about.