3 ms·

Serious question: is convenience for others the only bar we have to step over before enabling a certain type of utilitarian role? Precisely quantified utilitar

Serious question: is convenience for others the only bar we have to step over before enabling a certain type of utilitarian role? Precisely quantified utilitarianism is the way? Quantified by who? Is our math, purposefully constrained for consistency, the right tool for that job? What long term impact on those workers and society does creating so many low-effort monotonous jobs have? Is there an upside besides expansion of low effort consumption and criticism of real effort?

johannes1234321 6y ago
It matches the Zeitgeist of individualism we are in, which is destructing politics. Politics are about finding a common path for a society. A world where I optimizer for myself is very different, from one where I optimizer for society.
- srsQtho00 6y ago
  What is it? Who is we? What common path are you referring to? What are its attributes in terms of maximizing individual time economy? IMO that’s what the sharing through social effort is. Maximizing each individuals time economy. Instead we seem to be maximizing time economy for people who can pay to externalize effort. We’re really not optimizing for self by taking on more hours for less pay to keep Wall Street up. Which to me ties right in with creating low effort jobs. Rather than decrease the amount of real work by expanding access to that work. Let’s just hand out mops and brooms. Heard there’s coal to shovel out east! Who knows, having more time may make things like cleaning a toilet and picking up packages seem less onerous. We’re optimizing for a minority to be coddled by the effort of the majority. And being paid off with a fraction of the real output given the math I see. Based upon hand me down stories from people with a very different intuition for quantification and science. Would someone explain to me how kowtowing to such a social reality makes any sense scientifically? Westerners all on about “science!” could stand to take a long look at their actual beliefs and application of agency.

johannes1234321 6y ago

It matches the Zeitgeist of individualism we are in, which is destructing politics. Politics are about finding a common path for a society. A world where I optimizer for myself is very different, from one where I optimizer for society.

srsQtho00 6y ago
What is it? Who is we? What common path are you referring to? What are its attributes in terms of maximizing individual time economy? IMO that’s what the sharing through social effort is. Maximizing each individuals time economy. Instead we seem to be maximizing time economy for people who can pay to externalize effort. We’re really not optimizing for self by taking on more hours for less pay to keep Wall Street up. Which to me ties right in with creating low effort jobs. Rather than decrease the amount of real work by expanding access to that work. Let’s just hand out mops and brooms. Heard there’s coal to shovel out east! Who knows, having more time may make things like cleaning a toilet and picking up packages seem less onerous. We’re optimizing for a minority to be coddled by the effort of the majority. And being paid off with a fraction of the real output given the math I see. Based upon hand me down stories from people with a very different intuition for quantification and science. Would someone explain to me how kowtowing to such a social reality makes any sense scientifically? Westerners all on about “science!” could stand to take a long look at their actual beliefs and application of agency.