4 ms·

Society is collaborative, the private sector of society is not. Its a flawed incentive model that most of society periodically navigates through. These are diff

Society is collaborative, the private sector of society is not. Its a flawed incentive model that most of society periodically navigates through. These are different things than society as a whole. It is aspirational to want something else and be in an environment to rely on different advice. You are either conflating society and the private sector or projecting something I have no idea about. (I dont really understand who the “you shutting off opportunities” is about. What specific thing am I doing exactly?)

uoaei 5y ago
Innovation rate in a society is roughly proportional to the branching factor of the possible futures that that society engenders. One way to reduce the branching factor is to consume (or store) resources that others may use to innovate. "Taking up space" in society corresponds to collecting and storing resources beyond the share which makes you productive, such that an opportunity cost is incurred. Insofar as there is a teleology to capitalist economic organization, it does not include a distribution of resources which optimizes opportunities. The profit motive ensures this. Delineating the private sector from society at large is an artificial distinction that does not reflect the material realities surrounding resource distribution and utilization. We are all part of one big network, and the boundaries described above are not obeyed by the chaos of self-emergent organization at these scales.
- twblalock 5y ago
  Seems like you've dug deep into the lexicon of grad-school postmodernism without saying anything that makes any sense.
  - uoaei 5y ago
    I invite you to cite one postmodern philosopher who has used the phrase "branching factor". I am a systems theorist by training.
- vmception 5y ago
  The for-profit corporation can survive with “mercenaries” coming and going, compared to the risk averse co-dependent people married to their fake corporation family, the largest and most profitable ones have very high actual and expected attrition, tech workers finally normalizing 1-2 year stints and being okay professionally for the next stint. For the people who don't know they can operate this way, now they have advice on how to. Society wont be worse off because more employees are looking out for themselves instead of falling for company rhetoric. Just as the article said, if you aspire for something else, support a unionization effort.
  - uoaei 5y ago
    You seem to be implying that there is only one alternative to the current situation: that if you don't want to be a ruthless mercenary the only alternative is to become a sycophant, a simp for the corporation which pays your bills. How unimaginative. Unions are necessary but insufficient. Why is there no discussion about further alternatives in your replies? Cooperative ownership structures are prevalent and successful by multiple metrics. Do you wish to limit the conversation to only those defensible by your preconceptions?
    - vmception 5y ago
      > Why is there no discussion about further alternatives in your replies? Cooperative ownership structures are prevalent and successful by multiple metrics. Do you wish to limit the conversation to only those defensible by your preconceptions? Sure, no, I don't like false dilemmas and am only pointing out that everything you're talking about is aspirational. It means, it doesn't currently exist in the US in any reliable fashion so a current employee that isn't a labor rights activist cannot assume they'll encounter those environments. I'm a fan of things I've seen in developed countries, such as the employee union having a board seat by law, which also relies on such union existing, this thread isn't about those structures. In the present, in the US, the dichotomy you summarized is what I perceive.

uoaei 5y ago

Innovation rate in a society is roughly proportional to the branching factor of the possible futures that that society engenders. One way to reduce the branching factor is to consume (or store) resources that others may use to innovate. "Taking up space" in society corresponds to collecting and storing resources beyond the share which makes you productive, such that an opportunity cost is incurred. Insofar as there is a teleology to capitalist economic organization, it does not include a distribution of resources which optimizes opportunities. The profit motive ensures this. Delineating the private sector from society at large is an artificial distinction that does not reflect the material realities surrounding resource distribution and utilization. We are all part of one big network, and the boundaries described above are not obeyed by the chaos of self-emergent organization at these scales.

twblalock 5y ago
Seems like you've dug deep into the lexicon of grad-school postmodernism without saying anything that makes any sense.
- uoaei 5y ago
  I invite you to cite one postmodern philosopher who has used the phrase "branching factor". I am a systems theorist by training.
vmception 5y ago
The for-profit corporation can survive with “mercenaries” coming and going, compared to the risk averse co-dependent people married to their fake corporation family, the largest and most profitable ones have very high actual and expected attrition, tech workers finally normalizing 1-2 year stints and being okay professionally for the next stint. For the people who don't know they can operate this way, now they have advice on how to. Society wont be worse off because more employees are looking out for themselves instead of falling for company rhetoric. Just as the article said, if you aspire for something else, support a unionization effort.
- uoaei 5y ago
  You seem to be implying that there is only one alternative to the current situation: that if you don't want to be a ruthless mercenary the only alternative is to become a sycophant, a simp for the corporation which pays your bills. How unimaginative. Unions are necessary but insufficient. Why is there no discussion about further alternatives in your replies? Cooperative ownership structures are prevalent and successful by multiple metrics. Do you wish to limit the conversation to only those defensible by your preconceptions?
  - vmception 5y ago
    > Why is there no discussion about further alternatives in your replies? Cooperative ownership structures are prevalent and successful by multiple metrics. Do you wish to limit the conversation to only those defensible by your preconceptions? Sure, no, I don't like false dilemmas and am only pointing out that everything you're talking about is aspirational. It means, it doesn't currently exist in the US in any reliable fashion so a current employee that isn't a labor rights activist cannot assume they'll encounter those environments. I'm a fan of things I've seen in developed countries, such as the employee union having a board seat by law, which also relies on such union existing, this thread isn't about those structures. In the present, in the US, the dichotomy you summarized is what I perceive.