4 ms·

Anyone confident in any answer here is too confident to listen to. But I generally think of it as a natural result of big change. Big economic/political/tech s

Anyone confident in any answer here is too confident to listen to. But I generally think of it as a natural result of big change. Big economic/political/tech shifts leave people mistrusting old institutions that naturally aren’t well equipped to handle the new situation. The institutions screw up, electors lose trust, and new folks take over. The new folks (being new, and sometimes being the less-competent rejects) tend to misunderstand the institution, and change things that aren’t necessary; they overreact. What you’re seeing is just the overreactions: they’re knocking out walls, and sometimes they hit the wrong wall. But you also don’t see the benefits because effective bureaucratic adaptation is boring. The thing I wonder about is if the seeming endless screw ups are because we have more change today, more morons, or we just see it all more.

elmomle 4y ago
I agree mostly but would amend one thing: I think there is a mix of well-meaning overreaction and often substantial hubris. Politicians tend to have big egos, and many, especially of the upstart class, seem to mistake popular appeal for efficacy ("people seem to really like this platform--I must be on to something here"). So in these cases they'll ignore their lack of understanding of finance and do random or inadvisable things in the hope that the outcome will be good--and if so they'll be heroes. I don't think they realize that awful outcomes are actually quite possible when pulling big levers in complex systems you don't understand, and that awful outcomes had previously been avoided because, in recent memory, policy decisions tended to be made with a measure of respect, at least, for the things that might absolutely, causally wreck the economy.
- bruce511 4y ago
  At the opposite end of the global scale, I've often seen new (young) employees, arrive and immediately start suggesting sweeping changes. We're using the wrong language, the wrong source control, the wrong methodologies, the wrong libraries, and so on. If the flavor of the month is say BoringSSL we should be working to switch all our code from OpenSSL and so on. Usualy it takes a bit of effort to bring them up to speed. There are positives and negatives to all choices. Usually I assign them the task of coming up with 5 downsides to their suggestions. Articulating the downsides helps to show you understand the whole impact of an idea, and thus aren't making a "buying the koolaid" decision simply based on popular opinion.
gsatic 4y ago
Not new. Lot of examples from history under the Theory of Bounded Rationality. Theory says there is an upper limit to the complexity any group of chimps can handle.

elmomle 4y ago

I agree mostly but would amend one thing: I think there is a mix of well-meaning overreaction and often substantial hubris. Politicians tend to have big egos, and many, especially of the upstart class, seem to mistake popular appeal for efficacy ("people seem to really like this platform--I must be on to something here"). So in these cases they'll ignore their lack of understanding of finance and do random or inadvisable things in the hope that the outcome will be good--and if so they'll be heroes. I don't think they realize that awful outcomes are actually quite possible when pulling big levers in complex systems you don't understand, and that awful outcomes had previously been avoided because, in recent memory, policy decisions tended to be made with a measure of respect, at least, for the things that might absolutely, causally wreck the economy.

bruce511 4y ago
At the opposite end of the global scale, I've often seen new (young) employees, arrive and immediately start suggesting sweeping changes. We're using the wrong language, the wrong source control, the wrong methodologies, the wrong libraries, and so on. If the flavor of the month is say BoringSSL we should be working to switch all our code from OpenSSL and so on. Usualy it takes a bit of effort to bring them up to speed. There are positives and negatives to all choices. Usually I assign them the task of coming up with 5 downsides to their suggestions. Articulating the downsides helps to show you understand the whole impact of an idea, and thus aren't making a "buying the koolaid" decision simply based on popular opinion.

gsatic 4y ago

Not new. Lot of examples from history under the Theory of Bounded Rationality. Theory says there is an upper limit to the complexity any group of chimps can handle.