3 ms·

> and get your head spun around enough by trade-offs you don't know how to navigate but have to deal with immediately, and you'll get a kind of "trade off numbn

> and get your head spun around enough by trade-offs you don't know how to navigate but have to deal with immediately, and you'll get a kind of "trade off numbness" I wonder if this could explain why corporations grow into slow behemoths, as a kind of subconscious moral cover. Most people think the causal arrow happens one way, ie. corporations grow due to efficiencies or other factors and moral rot is a side-effect, but maybe it's actually the other way around in some cases. Since everyone tries to see themselves as basically good, but they still want to make money and be profitable, they migrate towards structures with extra layers that provide extra plausible deniability and obfuscation of questionable moral decisions.

bumby 3y ago
A Freakonomics episode claims that corporations "grow into slow behemoths" because, by the nature of being successful, you tend to have more programs to maintain. So you spend more time in maintenance mode and outsource your innovation by acquiring scrappy start-ups. It's a risk/reward tradeoff of its own.
- overvale 3y ago
  This matches my experience. Complexity is a real problem. I've found this video does a good job outlining how this happens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I
  - torvald 3y ago
    > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I Good watch, thanks!
dinvlad 3y ago
I think the opposite applies too - "move fast and break things" is a helluva excuse for doing extremely shady things and not worry about the consequences. Culture and incentives are just extremely hard to get right and align with the morals, and it's a continuous struggle for any business. And this applies even to solo companies.
- avs733 3y ago
  a mentor once referred to it as 'ship fast and shout down externalities' which always stuck with me That all being said I think for many people the ability to have a bright line is because the abstractions involved in deeply understanding these types of trade offs are not a common part of life. We are (nearly) universally worse at the types of reasoning (especially reasoning with abstractions) that we don't do frequently.
overvale 3y ago
Haha. Yes. Basic risk aversion.

bumby 3y ago

A Freakonomics episode claims that corporations "grow into slow behemoths" because, by the nature of being successful, you tend to have more programs to maintain. So you spend more time in maintenance mode and outsource your innovation by acquiring scrappy start-ups. It's a risk/reward tradeoff of its own.

overvale 3y ago
This matches my experience. Complexity is a real problem. I've found this video does a good job outlining how this happens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I
- torvald 3y ago
  > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp4RCIfX66I Good watch, thanks!

dinvlad 3y ago

I think the opposite applies too - "move fast and break things" is a helluva excuse for doing extremely shady things and not worry about the consequences. Culture and incentives are just extremely hard to get right and align with the morals, and it's a continuous struggle for any business. And this applies even to solo companies.

avs733 3y ago
a mentor once referred to it as 'ship fast and shout down externalities' which always stuck with me That all being said I think for many people the ability to have a bright line is because the abstractions involved in deeply understanding these types of trade offs are not a common part of life. We are (nearly) universally worse at the types of reasoning (especially reasoning with abstractions) that we don't do frequently.

overvale 3y ago

Haha. Yes. Basic risk aversion.