5 ms·

For what it’s worth, while these things are undoubtedly more useful than bored apes, it’s not where I’d be investing my money if I were a billionaire. While th

by rgmerk 3y ago

For what it’s worth, while these things are undoubtedly more useful than bored apes, it’s not where I’d be investing my money if I were a billionaire. While the idea of cost-benefit analysis in philanthropy has gotten a bad reputation after going down some very weird rabbit holes recently, the idea behind it isn’t completely crazy. Building toilets may not be as sexy as reattaching nerves but the cost-benefit ratios are pretty attractive.

tiffanyg 3y ago
You said it man!* I find the 'ethics' of everything complicated, lately. But, simple non-flashy action to just try to relieve some suffering is about as ... therapeutic as it gets - for everyone, I think. It reminds me of that great folk tune, "Simple Gifts" (famously set by Copeland [in his style]). There's quite a bit to be said for the ideas of groups like the 'Shakers' (though strict celibacy for all does tend to be quite a headwind for perpetuation). There is something very significant in the idea framed, for example, in the Christian Bible as "private prayer"** - the effects this has on the function and other characteristics of a person AND their community (which ideally is the world). The mindset of as substantial a 'selflessness' as is possible for humans seems to make the world much more livable, simple, etc. (for anyone who practices towards it). It doesn't seem so common among people who become billionaires, though - this is not a dig at them at all, nor do I wish to end this comment on the subject in general. But, what's truly absurd and sad, to me, is that what everyone actually wants tends to get further away the more you cling to anything ... simply accumulate anything, including money. * (John Turturro voice, always hear in my head, omit details as much as I can 'help myself' tho...) ** Matthew 6:5, for example - this is ending up rather 'Christianity-heavy', but the key messages are quite 'agnostic' IMO. I find them more-or-less in the 'useful' "spiritual systems" from all regions ...
bdw5204 3y ago
I'd say the best thing for billionaires to spend their money on would be whatever they're interested in. I think philanthropy is probably a poor use of resources compared to starting businesses with a purpose other than just maximizing shareholder value. A business where the goal is to just break even is a business that can focus on maximizing its positive impact on the world. Realistically speaking, no human institution will remain true to its original purpose for very long after the death or departure of its founder. Institutions drift, whether towards maximizing shareholder value (if a publicly traded, i.e. de-facto ownerless, corporation) or towards pushing a political agenda (if a non-profit foundation). The only way to have a chance of avoiding this drift is for the founder to pass on true ownership of the institution to somebody whom he believes shares his vision. Even then, that doesn't exactly work out perfectly because eventually the owner is going to make a poor choice for his successor and the successor will either run the institution into the ground or sell the institution because he doesn't actually want it.
hermitcrab 3y ago
Is that bored apes grift still a thing? Or did it completely implode?
- rgmerk 3y ago
  Market has crashed from its highs but it hasn’t completely imploded (sigh). According to [1], the current minimum value of a bored ape is the equivalent of about $48,000 USD. I’d be surprised if the price ever goes to zero unless the trading infrastructure completely collapses (which isn’t exactly beyond the realms of probability). I imagine that there would be a demand if the price went down enough (and I’m talking to something in the tens of US dollars) from crypto critics who’d enjoy purchasing them from the crypto bulls for the schadenfreude.

by rgmerk 3y ago

tiffanyg 3y ago

You said it man!* I find the 'ethics' of everything complicated, lately. But, simple non-flashy action to just try to relieve some suffering is about as ... therapeutic as it gets - for everyone, I think. It reminds me of that great folk tune, "Simple Gifts" (famously set by Copeland [in his style]). There's quite a bit to be said for the ideas of groups like the 'Shakers' (though strict celibacy for all does tend to be quite a headwind for perpetuation). There is something very significant in the idea framed, for example, in the Christian Bible as "private prayer"** - the effects this has on the function and other characteristics of a person AND their community (which ideally is the world). The mindset of as substantial a 'selflessness' as is possible for humans seems to make the world much more livable, simple, etc. (for anyone who practices towards it). It doesn't seem so common among people who become billionaires, though - this is not a dig at them at all, nor do I wish to end this comment on the subject in general. But, what's truly absurd and sad, to me, is that what everyone actually wants tends to get further away the more you cling to anything ... simply accumulate anything, including money. * (John Turturro voice, always hear in my head, omit details as much as I can 'help myself' tho...) ** Matthew 6:5, for example - this is ending up rather 'Christianity-heavy', but the key messages are quite 'agnostic' IMO. I find them more-or-less in the 'useful' "spiritual systems" from all regions ...

bdw5204 3y ago

I'd say the best thing for billionaires to spend their money on would be whatever they're interested in. I think philanthropy is probably a poor use of resources compared to starting businesses with a purpose other than just maximizing shareholder value. A business where the goal is to just break even is a business that can focus on maximizing its positive impact on the world. Realistically speaking, no human institution will remain true to its original purpose for very long after the death or departure of its founder. Institutions drift, whether towards maximizing shareholder value (if a publicly traded, i.e. de-facto ownerless, corporation) or towards pushing a political agenda (if a non-profit foundation). The only way to have a chance of avoiding this drift is for the founder to pass on true ownership of the institution to somebody whom he believes shares his vision. Even then, that doesn't exactly work out perfectly because eventually the owner is going to make a poor choice for his successor and the successor will either run the institution into the ground or sell the institution because he doesn't actually want it.

hermitcrab 3y ago

Is that bored apes grift still a thing? Or did it completely implode?

rgmerk 3y ago
Market has crashed from its highs but it hasn’t completely imploded (sigh). According to [1], the current minimum value of a bored ape is the equivalent of about $48,000 USD. I’d be surprised if the price ever goes to zero unless the trading infrastructure completely collapses (which isn’t exactly beyond the realms of probability). I imagine that there would be a demand if the price went down enough (and I’m talking to something in the tens of US dollars) from crypto critics who’d enjoy purchasing them from the crypto bulls for the schadenfreude.