9 ms·

Billionaire can also be framed as succeeding at creating a power differential at scale. The trick is that you can't achieve scale without using power differenti

Billionaire can also be framed as succeeding at creating a power differential at scale. The trick is that you can't achieve scale without using power differentials, and iphones are the fruit of scale. Idea: what you kind of want is for the power difference to decay at scale, so that way you don't have amazon workers pissing in water bottles. Remember: "Sufficiently Powerful Optimization Of Any Known Target Destroys All Value" [1] – I wonder if PG has read that? [1] https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/12/31/does-big-business-hate-your-family/ https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/12/31/does-big-business-ha...

Emphere 6y ago
Very good, something I have been thinking about as well. Inequality is bad because of the massive power differentials. How do you propose we "solve" that while still being able to reap the benefits of scale? Any pointers or books to read about this topic? Admittedly I haven't looked too hard.
- dustingetz 6y ago
  Idea for the solution is to get everyone together to opt-in to a value system that demonizes excess accumulation. That sounds crazy/impossible today, but on lets say, a 2000 year timespan could we get there? 2000 years ago, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" was a seminal idea, eventually resulting in the world today where killing is demonized and this is existence proof of a solution. We can then abstract to the general class of game theory coordination dilemmas stuck at backstab/backstab, of which both covid and climate change are instances. The will/power of billions of people outweighs the power of a few (regardless of how concentrated the wealth is as wealth is an abstraction), and the internet offers a means for billions of people to coordinate. I conclude that the needed points of leverage are available today/ right now and simply awaiting a great leader to recognize the opportunity, figure out the play and execute it. And the way ideas spread online, I bet the world can reconfigure itself in not 2000 years, but 20 - a single business cycle.
  - johndevor 6y ago
    Define "excess" I'm glad people like Elon Musk and Bill Gates have billions of dollars - they're solving some of the world's hardest challenges right now with their wealth.
    - rhizome 6y ago
      With pittances. What is an example of even a $20 billion project by a private party? Elon Musk's current wealth could fund SpaceX for over 350 years. I have a favorite illustration of what just one billion dollars is: a million dollars per week for almost 20 years.
      - johndevor 6y ago
        > With pittances. Bill Gates is giving away the vast majority of his wealth You don't know what Elon Musk will do with his wealth, but given his track record -- probably something good for humanity
        klyrs 6y ago
        Probably something good for technology. I haven't seen much to indicate a focus on "humanity"
        rhizome 6y ago
        > Bill Gates is giving away the vast majority of his wealth That's a tax-avoidance scheme. Here's a recent (and certainly not the first) article laying it out: https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/bill-gates-promised-to-give-away-his-wealth-well-that-was-bs.html https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/bill-gates-promised-to-gi... > You don't know what Elon Musk will do with his wealth I think we both know that whatever it is, first and foremost it'll be good for Elon Musk.
    - ardy42 6y ago
      >> Idea for the solution is to get everyone together to opt-in to a value system that demonizes excess accumulation. > I'm glad people like Elon Musk and Bill Gates have billions of dollars - they're solving some of the world's hardest challenges right now with their wealth. There's a difference between having billions of dollars and controlling billions of dollars. Having usually implies controlling, but it's not necessary for that. A hypothetical value system that "demonizes excess accumulation" will can still allow talented people to use massive resources to solve challenging problems. For an actual real-world example: the US didn't have to wait for a SF fan to become a billionaire before it built rockets to travel to the moon. Similarly, billionaires often don't solve any problems with their wealth. Musk spends millions to build rockets and win government contracts, but other purported billionaires spend millions on money-losing golf courses and vanity airlines instead.
- dustingetz 6y ago
  here is an easy paper about "the elements of a general theory of social change" http://home.uchicago.edu/~rmyerson/research/stratofc.pdf http://home.uchicago.edu/~rmyerson/research/stratofc.pdf
- riggernetard 6y ago
  massive power differentials are a physical property of a complex system. not everyone knows how to run the internet, and anyone who does has power over ... most of it. any 'scale' will lead to a larger power differential than being monkeys in caves, which already was not 'nice'
breck 6y ago
I think there's an important point here. Bill Gates wouldn't be a billionaire if he didn't build amazing things, but he also exploited at scale the unjust IP ("ImaginaryProperty") system, which was a critical part of achieving the scale Microsoft achieved. Startups like Airbnb and Lyft likewise have built amazing things, and would easily make their founders 100' millionaires, but there is a point where to reach a certain level you need to leverage some flawed, unjust legal system at scale (stupid regulations around housing/hospitality/and taxis, in these examples). None of these founders created these legal systems, but their rapid success and scale I can't see happening without those dumb legal environments they found when they started. Now, maybe the best method to fix unjust laws is exactly this: when you see a stupid legal system, found a company to exploit it, become a billionaire and then finally society will take notice that the legal system is stupid and will fix it. So I could see an argument that maybe not only should we not penalize billionaires who built their wealth from scratch, but we should thank them, like we thank white-hats, for identifying inequitable laws that they were able to leverage at scale.
- nthj 6y ago
  You offered up 3 examples of billionaires. Other examples might be: * Tesla * Twilio * Stripe Would you help me see how those 3 leveraged unjust laws? As a software developer, I feel Stripe and Twilio have added a lot of value to me, to small businesses, and the world.
  - breck 6y ago
    Sorry, I think my writing was a bit muddled (common occurrence). I love those businesses I mentioned. And the 3 you mentioned too. I 100% agree they have added a lot of value to me and the world. What I was trying to say is that to make billions, you need to 1) create a lot of value and 2) have some broken legal system that you are operating in. Maybe for the latter "exploiting" is the wrong word. But the government needs to have created a situation where you can somehow reap a disproportionate reward. Linus created Linux and Git, which have created unimaginable value, but he didn't do #2 which was to use the unjust IP system to make billions of dollars. In other words. Lyft is a product of hard work and innovation multiplied by corruption and bad government in the taxi industry. The value created by Lyft comes from the former, but the value captured by Lyft is just as dependent on the latter as well. Nothing wrong with that—it's still a big net win for society, but maybe we could do a better job at refactoring our laws so we can get the value without the unnatural inequities. After all, I know a lot of these people and while they are almost all smarter than me, none of them is 10x smarter than me (well maybe pg). In response to your 3 examples: * Tesla Carbons were subsidized and solar/electric better tech. Automotive industry is highly regulated and innovation was sloooow. Elon and company are the best of the best (a shareholder), but still I'm not going to pretend that the business opportunity would be so great if the governments around the world hadn't been creating corruption after corruption (look at the car dealership stuff with the states as a tiny but egregious example). * Twilio Oh man the telecom infra went from magic to just rotten in the past few decades. I don't know enough about government here to comment, but I suspect something bad here. * Stripe The amount of protection the finance and banking industry has (and their symbiotic relationship with the government) made me sick so many times. Finally someone had the stamina and determination to solve that. But Stripe isn't hitting $100B if US Government wasn't letting the finance industry sit on its ass for 3 decades with protective legislation.

Emphere 6y ago

Very good, something I have been thinking about as well. Inequality is bad because of the massive power differentials. How do you propose we "solve" that while still being able to reap the benefits of scale? Any pointers or books to read about this topic? Admittedly I haven't looked too hard.

dustingetz 6y ago
Idea for the solution is to get everyone together to opt-in to a value system that demonizes excess accumulation. That sounds crazy/impossible today, but on lets say, a 2000 year timespan could we get there? 2000 years ago, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" was a seminal idea, eventually resulting in the world today where killing is demonized and this is existence proof of a solution. We can then abstract to the general class of game theory coordination dilemmas stuck at backstab/backstab, of which both covid and climate change are instances. The will/power of billions of people outweighs the power of a few (regardless of how concentrated the wealth is as wealth is an abstraction), and the internet offers a means for billions of people to coordinate. I conclude that the needed points of leverage are available today/ right now and simply awaiting a great leader to recognize the opportunity, figure out the play and execute it. And the way ideas spread online, I bet the world can reconfigure itself in not 2000 years, but 20 - a single business cycle.
- johndevor 6y ago
  Define "excess" I'm glad people like Elon Musk and Bill Gates have billions of dollars - they're solving some of the world's hardest challenges right now with their wealth.
  - rhizome 6y ago
    With pittances. What is an example of even a $20 billion project by a private party? Elon Musk's current wealth could fund SpaceX for over 350 years. I have a favorite illustration of what just one billion dollars is: a million dollars per week for almost 20 years.
    - johndevor 6y ago
      > With pittances. Bill Gates is giving away the vast majority of his wealth You don't know what Elon Musk will do with his wealth, but given his track record -- probably something good for humanity
      - klyrs 6y ago
        Probably something good for technology. I haven't seen much to indicate a focus on "humanity"
      - rhizome 6y ago
        > Bill Gates is giving away the vast majority of his wealth That's a tax-avoidance scheme. Here's a recent (and certainly not the first) article laying it out: https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/bill-gates-promised-to-give-away-his-wealth-well-that-was-bs.html https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/bill-gates-promised-to-gi... > You don't know what Elon Musk will do with his wealth I think we both know that whatever it is, first and foremost it'll be good for Elon Musk.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    >> Idea for the solution is to get everyone together to opt-in to a value system that demonizes excess accumulation. > I'm glad people like Elon Musk and Bill Gates have billions of dollars - they're solving some of the world's hardest challenges right now with their wealth. There's a difference between having billions of dollars and controlling billions of dollars. Having usually implies controlling, but it's not necessary for that. A hypothetical value system that "demonizes excess accumulation" will can still allow talented people to use massive resources to solve challenging problems. For an actual real-world example: the US didn't have to wait for a SF fan to become a billionaire before it built rockets to travel to the moon. Similarly, billionaires often don't solve any problems with their wealth. Musk spends millions to build rockets and win government contracts, but other purported billionaires spend millions on money-losing golf courses and vanity airlines instead.
dustingetz 6y ago
here is an easy paper about "the elements of a general theory of social change" http://home.uchicago.edu/~rmyerson/research/stratofc.pdf http://home.uchicago.edu/~rmyerson/research/stratofc.pdf
riggernetard 6y ago
massive power differentials are a physical property of a complex system. not everyone knows how to run the internet, and anyone who does has power over ... most of it. any 'scale' will lead to a larger power differential than being monkeys in caves, which already was not 'nice'

breck 6y ago

I think there's an important point here. Bill Gates wouldn't be a billionaire if he didn't build amazing things, but he also exploited at scale the unjust IP ("ImaginaryProperty") system, which was a critical part of achieving the scale Microsoft achieved. Startups like Airbnb and Lyft likewise have built amazing things, and would easily make their founders 100' millionaires, but there is a point where to reach a certain level you need to leverage some flawed, unjust legal system at scale (stupid regulations around housing/hospitality/and taxis, in these examples). None of these founders created these legal systems, but their rapid success and scale I can't see happening without those dumb legal environments they found when they started. Now, maybe the best method to fix unjust laws is exactly this: when you see a stupid legal system, found a company to exploit it, become a billionaire and then finally society will take notice that the legal system is stupid and will fix it. So I could see an argument that maybe not only should we not penalize billionaires who built their wealth from scratch, but we should thank them, like we thank white-hats, for identifying inequitable laws that they were able to leverage at scale.

nthj 6y ago
You offered up 3 examples of billionaires. Other examples might be: * Tesla * Twilio * Stripe Would you help me see how those 3 leveraged unjust laws? As a software developer, I feel Stripe and Twilio have added a lot of value to me, to small businesses, and the world.
- breck 6y ago
  Sorry, I think my writing was a bit muddled (common occurrence). I love those businesses I mentioned. And the 3 you mentioned too. I 100% agree they have added a lot of value to me and the world. What I was trying to say is that to make billions, you need to 1) create a lot of value and 2) have some broken legal system that you are operating in. Maybe for the latter "exploiting" is the wrong word. But the government needs to have created a situation where you can somehow reap a disproportionate reward. Linus created Linux and Git, which have created unimaginable value, but he didn't do #2 which was to use the unjust IP system to make billions of dollars. In other words. Lyft is a product of hard work and innovation multiplied by corruption and bad government in the taxi industry. The value created by Lyft comes from the former, but the value captured by Lyft is just as dependent on the latter as well. Nothing wrong with that—it's still a big net win for society, but maybe we could do a better job at refactoring our laws so we can get the value without the unnatural inequities. After all, I know a lot of these people and while they are almost all smarter than me, none of them is 10x smarter than me (well maybe pg). In response to your 3 examples: * Tesla Carbons were subsidized and solar/electric better tech. Automotive industry is highly regulated and innovation was sloooow. Elon and company are the best of the best (a shareholder), but still I'm not going to pretend that the business opportunity would be so great if the governments around the world hadn't been creating corruption after corruption (look at the car dealership stuff with the states as a tiny but egregious example). * Twilio Oh man the telecom infra went from magic to just rotten in the past few decades. I don't know enough about government here to comment, but I suspect something bad here. * Stripe The amount of protection the finance and banking industry has (and their symbiotic relationship with the government) made me sick so many times. Finally someone had the stamina and determination to solve that. But Stripe isn't hitting $100B if US Government wasn't letting the finance industry sit on its ass for 3 decades with protective legislation.