4 ms·

It is objectively true (is, not ought) that in the world we currently live in, large orgs enable scale which enables modern living. It does not follow that I t

It is objectively true (is, not ought) that in the world we currently live in, large orgs enable scale which enables modern living. It does not follow that I think that's the way things ought to be. That's how I interpret the "better" in EGreg's comment, because this conversation is about how we can live a better lives, not how to maximize efficiency. But we can only talk about oughts in the context of what can be. What I'd like - as I've mentioned in another comment here - is some kind of organizational technology which enables the same efficiencies as large orgs, but without the alienation of labour.

ericns 6y ago
What are you organizing around Mr. Chief Architect? Your company does data visualization for financial firms. Financial firms that don't have a loss condition. How many extrapolations from reality is your business? At least 2, maybe 3, more? As long as the markets your pretty pictures represent can't take a loss - you're only justifying your undeserved opulence. Every bail out absolves people like you from their failure, and denies people like me a better opportunity to out perform you. Have the labor classes of the U.S. seen any advancement in the last few decades? Are the advances the labor classes of other (US/India) even worthwhile given the lack of political bargaining power? You economically depress local workers, and sell them on their freedoms and in then in the next breath you're politically oppressing foreign labor classes while selling them on their economic advances. Both are true, but you take the larger margin from both.
carapace 6y ago
Ah, I get it. I was interested (from a distance) in "Holacracy" but it's hard to find information about how well it works in practice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy Also, FWIW, I'm hoping that automation frees up enough time to be able to support "consensus driven" governance, which is I suspect is theoretically optimal, but it's really expensive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making

ericns 6y ago

What are you organizing around Mr. Chief Architect? Your company does data visualization for financial firms. Financial firms that don't have a loss condition. How many extrapolations from reality is your business? At least 2, maybe 3, more? As long as the markets your pretty pictures represent can't take a loss - you're only justifying your undeserved opulence. Every bail out absolves people like you from their failure, and denies people like me a better opportunity to out perform you. Have the labor classes of the U.S. seen any advancement in the last few decades? Are the advances the labor classes of other (US/India) even worthwhile given the lack of political bargaining power? You economically depress local workers, and sell them on their freedoms and in then in the next breath you're politically oppressing foreign labor classes while selling them on their economic advances. Both are true, but you take the larger margin from both.

carapace 6y ago

Ah, I get it. I was interested (from a distance) in "Holacracy" but it's hard to find information about how well it works in practice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy Also, FWIW, I'm hoping that automation frees up enough time to be able to support "consensus driven" governance, which is I suspect is theoretically optimal, but it's really expensive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making