3 ms·

I would counter by saying that entertainment is actually valuable. Gambling and playing games are things that people choose to spend their time and money doing

I would counter by saying that entertainment is actually valuable. Gambling and playing games are things that people choose to spend their time and money doing because they are fun. (Obviously taking advantages of addiction is immoral, but that’s a whole other bag of worms). As for optimizing trading algos, the counter is that making markets more efficient is also valuable to society at large, and that is what most quants would say they are doing. As you pointed out in some other comments, there are certainly issues with the current system. Though, I don’t think the conclusion is for people to stop working entirely. If that were the case all of these “useless” jobs would go away and we would then ask farmers to give us food in exchange for nothing at all? I think what might be better is offering more incentives for people to work in industries that make a real positive impact on the world. And in lieu of that, people who feel they aren’t contributing in a meaningful way can try to seek out more meaningful work. And we as a society should support *that*.

bjourne 5y ago
Your counter-argument to my examples of worthless work is "well, actually, that work is valuable!" The reason why you use this argument is because we are so conditioned to believe that money is the same thing as value. Thus, by definition, every work is valuable because someone pays. Try and think of it from a utilitarian perspective. Is some aaa game creating or destroying more happiness? Is it a net positive for society? For some games perhaps the answer is yes, for others it is no. Children getting obese from sedentary lifestyle and not socialising with friends is certainly a large cost. > If that were the case all of these “useless” jobs would go away and we would then ask farmers to give us food in exchange for nothing at all? Sure.
- dnadler 5y ago
  Well, yes, people find the work in your examples valuable. I can say that for sure because they are willing to spend their money on it. > Sure. Ha, then the farmers would say "no" and you'd starve to death?

bjourne 5y ago

Your counter-argument to my examples of worthless work is "well, actually, that work is valuable!" The reason why you use this argument is because we are so conditioned to believe that money is the same thing as value. Thus, by definition, every work is valuable because someone pays. Try and think of it from a utilitarian perspective. Is some aaa game creating or destroying more happiness? Is it a net positive for society? For some games perhaps the answer is yes, for others it is no. Children getting obese from sedentary lifestyle and not socialising with friends is certainly a large cost. > If that were the case all of these “useless” jobs would go away and we would then ask farmers to give us food in exchange for nothing at all? Sure.

dnadler 5y ago
Well, yes, people find the work in your examples valuable. I can say that for sure because they are willing to spend their money on it. > Sure. Ha, then the farmers would say "no" and you'd starve to death?