4 ms·

This comment feels like something written by GPT-3. What are you actually trying to say here?

by Polylactic_acid 6y ago

User23 6y ago
GP is saying that hyper-specialization is intrinsically fragile.
- Polylactic_acid 6y ago
  What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. I suppose you could say many things have failed due to no one seeing the big picture among all the tiny details but without people focusing on the details none of that would have been possible to begin with.
  - grp000 6y ago
    As things are getting more complex, more people become specialized, and there are a lot more interfaces between specialties that need to be properly defined so things don't break. The more interfaces mean a higher likelihood of a system going wrong. That, and I feel that as long as you have a good big picture, you have a higher fault tolerance because there is a general goal you can identify to strive towards when something does go wrong to correct it. Certainly, I feel that in any field that has become sufficiently complex, there is a practical human limit for a single person to understand the field as a whole. Even if someone can claim to understand a field as a whole in a general sense and how it's major components interact, they will still lose information because of how much they have to abstract.
    - jcelerier 6y ago
      The reality does not seem to match that though. Pretty much everything not born out of negative emotions is better than it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. Tons of jobs don't need to be done anymore, and more are becoming automated, which is quite often better than human beings's much stronger randomness.
  - goatinaboat 6y ago
    What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. You should read Collapse Of Complex Societies by Professor Joseph Tainter. Tl;dr a step change in complexity of ancient societies more often than not lead to their downfall. They were unable to train/retrain specialists quickly enough to deal with surprises.
  - cyberdrunk 6y ago
    > What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. I'm not a historian but I can imagine that a medieval specialist, such as for example blacksmith, could very much fix his own house (or maybe even build a new one), grow food, take care of animals, make wooden tools, make some simple herbal medicine etc. I'm guessing a lot of he was consuming was produced by himself and his family. Today, for engineers it's the total opposite - we only consume things produced by others, and essentially by strangers whom we've never met. Regarding fragility specifically, if a major crisis comes (say a war), the desk jockeys, esp. ones didn't have the wisdom to accumulate resources, will fare much worse than someone who's say running a homestead. If they did accumulate resources (provided they don't become worthless by hiperinflation etc.), they will be able to buy the essentials and hope their stash lasts until the end of the crisis.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  I can't agree with that. >> The social impact, for one, is in general a large extent of estrangement from our human essence. Tangibility is intuitive, abstraction, not so much. Specialization does introduce fragility, but that's something you brought to the discussion, not something that was present in the comment. This seems more like the common complaint that working on abstract fuzzy intangible things is damaging to your soul.
AmericanChopper 6y ago
Labor alienation is a Marx theory that private labor alienates the laborer from their humanity, their coworkers and the product they are ultimately making. It’s a high-minded way of saying “you’re a cog in the machine and that is very bad”. Using it as a counter argument against specialization isn’t very insightful though. Not even Marx tried to argue that (to Marx specialization was only alienating when you did it for the benefit of the bourgeoisie). Specialization is one of the most fundamental components of a developed economy. If you look at any ancient agrarian society, they had barely any specialization compared to a modern developed economy, and if you track the economic development of any society, you’ll notice specialization ticks upward along with it.

This comment feels like something written by GPT-3. What are you actually trying to say here?

User23 6y ago

GP is saying that hyper-specialization is intrinsically fragile.

Polylactic_acid 6y ago
What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. I suppose you could say many things have failed due to no one seeing the big picture among all the tiny details but without people focusing on the details none of that would have been possible to begin with.
- grp000 6y ago
  As things are getting more complex, more people become specialized, and there are a lot more interfaces between specialties that need to be properly defined so things don't break. The more interfaces mean a higher likelihood of a system going wrong. That, and I feel that as long as you have a good big picture, you have a higher fault tolerance because there is a general goal you can identify to strive towards when something does go wrong to correct it. Certainly, I feel that in any field that has become sufficiently complex, there is a practical human limit for a single person to understand the field as a whole. Even if someone can claim to understand a field as a whole in a general sense and how it's major components interact, they will still lose information because of how much they have to abstract.
  - jcelerier 6y ago
    The reality does not seem to match that though. Pretty much everything not born out of negative emotions is better than it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. Tons of jobs don't need to be done anymore, and more are becoming automated, which is quite often better than human beings's much stronger randomness.
- goatinaboat 6y ago
  What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. You should read Collapse Of Complex Societies by Professor Joseph Tainter. Tl;dr a step change in complexity of ancient societies more often than not lead to their downfall. They were unable to train/retrain specialists quickly enough to deal with surprises.
- cyberdrunk 6y ago
  > What is fragile? We have had specialized roles for the entire history of society and it hasn't caused anything to crumble. I'm not a historian but I can imagine that a medieval specialist, such as for example blacksmith, could very much fix his own house (or maybe even build a new one), grow food, take care of animals, make wooden tools, make some simple herbal medicine etc. I'm guessing a lot of he was consuming was produced by himself and his family. Today, for engineers it's the total opposite - we only consume things produced by others, and essentially by strangers whom we've never met. Regarding fragility specifically, if a major crisis comes (say a war), the desk jockeys, esp. ones didn't have the wisdom to accumulate resources, will fare much worse than someone who's say running a homestead. If they did accumulate resources (provided they don't become worthless by hiperinflation etc.), they will be able to buy the essentials and hope their stash lasts until the end of the crisis.
thaumasiotes 6y ago
I can't agree with that. >> The social impact, for one, is in general a large extent of estrangement from our human essence. Tangibility is intuitive, abstraction, not so much. Specialization does introduce fragility, but that's something you brought to the discussion, not something that was present in the comment. This seems more like the common complaint that working on abstract fuzzy intangible things is damaging to your soul.

AmericanChopper 6y ago

Labor alienation is a Marx theory that private labor alienates the laborer from their humanity, their coworkers and the product they are ultimately making. It’s a high-minded way of saying “you’re a cog in the machine and that is very bad”. Using it as a counter argument against specialization isn’t very insightful though. Not even Marx tried to argue that (to Marx specialization was only alienating when you did it for the benefit of the bourgeoisie). Specialization is one of the most fundamental components of a developed economy. If you look at any ancient agrarian society, they had barely any specialization compared to a modern developed economy, and if you track the economic development of any society, you’ll notice specialization ticks upward along with it.