5 ms·

The author needs to learn some economics. Specialization is the very opposite of inefficiency. The most precious non-renewable resource is time. Quality of life

The author needs to learn some economics. Specialization is the very opposite of inefficiency. The most precious non-renewable resource is time. Quality of life of nomads is laughable compared to the sophistications of modern societies, only made possible by the division of labor. If anyone thinks he can find the time to become proficient enough in mechanical engineering to develop a radical new method of transportation, in between all the shelter-building, food-foraging, clean-water-supplying and clothes-washing that he does, he's simply delusional.

wtn 15y ago
You're attacking a strawman.
- daliusd 15y ago
  Maybe yes, maybe no. It is really hard to understand what author has in mind. That's actually poorest and most unclear part of manifesto.
Mikera 15y ago
You also need to learn some economics. There is substantial evidence and supporting theory to suggest that absolute material wealth (once it exceeds a certain level of basic needs) makes relatively little difference to quality of life. See the "Easterlin paradox". In particular, even if absolute material wealth does have some positive impact on quality of life, a culture that optimises solely for efficiency is almost certainly sub-optimal for quality of life. I bet if you search your own experience you will find times when you did something that you weren't good at (and could easily have been done better by someone else more specialised) and found that you enjoyed it. The feeling of achieving something new and different and surprising? That's called quality of life my friend..... and many nomads a few thousand years ago probably had just as much of it as we do today
- sans-serif 15y ago
  Oh, I certainly support and enjoy a bunch of activities you and the other have mentioned. Personal development, pushing one's limits, et cetera can be very fulfilling indeed. I just don't confuse those with productive efficiency—which supports the first three level of Maslow's pyramid, enabling man to enjoy relatively useless activities such as rock climbing and romance—and then go around and claim "inefficiency is wasteful".

wtn 15y ago

You're attacking a strawman.

daliusd 15y ago
Maybe yes, maybe no. It is really hard to understand what author has in mind. That's actually poorest and most unclear part of manifesto.

Mikera 15y ago

You also need to learn some economics. There is substantial evidence and supporting theory to suggest that absolute material wealth (once it exceeds a certain level of basic needs) makes relatively little difference to quality of life. See the "Easterlin paradox". In particular, even if absolute material wealth does have some positive impact on quality of life, a culture that optimises solely for efficiency is almost certainly sub-optimal for quality of life. I bet if you search your own experience you will find times when you did something that you weren't good at (and could easily have been done better by someone else more specialised) and found that you enjoyed it. The feeling of achieving something new and different and surprising? That's called quality of life my friend..... and many nomads a few thousand years ago probably had just as much of it as we do today

sans-serif 15y ago
Oh, I certainly support and enjoy a bunch of activities you and the other have mentioned. Personal development, pushing one's limits, et cetera can be very fulfilling indeed. I just don't confuse those with productive efficiency—which supports the first three level of Maslow's pyramid, enabling man to enjoy relatively useless activities such as rock climbing and romance—and then go around and claim "inefficiency is wasteful".