3 ms·

This is what I call a “load-bearing just”. Just do the thing and the problem is gone. Very similar to “Draw the rest of the owl.” The problem is people don’t

This is what I call a “load-bearing just”. Just do the thing and the problem is gone. Very similar to “Draw the rest of the owl.” The problem is people don’t “just”. We’re complicated critters with our own needs, capabilities, and goals. At an individual level, a person may not be capable of the “just” due to factors outside of their control. With a society, the resistance to change grows exponentially. You can’t scale one person at a time. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. Sometimes you can make a big difference to the people around you. But you’re gonna have a difficult time changing in the world.

chiefalchemist 2y ago
> With a society, the resistance to change grows exponentially Yes and no. There's certainly the potential for a more flexible and adapt-minded culture for the same reason there's not... Human behavior. Yes, once norms are established they're slow to change but that's how the culture is nudged and "managed". It's not necessarily how humans arw hardwired. Eons ago, slow to adapt would mean certain death. Currently, fast to adapt labels you a rebel, a freak, an odd-ball, etc.
- kayodelycaon 2y ago
  > norms are established they're slow to change That is all I meant when I said society.
  - chiefalchemist 2y ago
    And I'm saying that the current system is "optimized" by the powers that be to not change too fast. Humans have and can adept if they're allowed to do so. The current sociopolitical system doesn't allow this. The bottleneck to change isn't humans, it's the system.
abecedarius 2y ago
In this case it really is easy to try a different search engine and switch to it to the extent you prefer it. At least if you're not too uncomfortable using software.
- xigoi 2y ago
  Did you miss the “friends and family” part?
  - abecedarius 2y ago
    Are you saying friends and family using Google are an obstacle to you using something else? Or maybe if you use something else, that makes you so uncool that your friends and family are not more likely to follow you, but actually less? I guess what you're actually getting at is that my switching doesn't automatically make my friends and family switch, but why insist that change only happen in blocks of people all at once? How does that help?
    - xigoi 2y ago
      The original comment was pointing out that in order to break the monopoly of Google, the wide society will need to switch to something else, not just a few tech-interested people.
      - abecedarius 2y ago
        The thing is, that kind of logic claiming the futility of individual action does not weaken the grandparent's advice. If you're an advertiser, you can't just switch from Google and hope to change anything. You'd be hurting yourself to no benefit, probably. Collective action is your main hope. It's not like this for users of search. Google can lose its search leadership one user at a time. When the user switches, "the problem is gone" for that user, and Google has that much less revenue. Gradient descent is powerful.
- kayodelycaon 2y ago
  Actually, that’s exactly my point. The “thing” is always trivial to the person making the statement. The “just” refers to ignoring that other factors are involved. If your personal goal is to convert X people to do something, you are accounting for it. If your goal is a specific call to action to have people voluntarily join you, you are accounting for it. If you’re stating a lot of people need to change, you’re acknowledging the scope of the problem. If you’re doing these things, you can make a difference. Go do the thing! Have others join you! If you say everyone should just do it and walk away thinking you have the solution to the problem, you don’t. :)
jqpabc123 2y ago
Settings | Search | Choose anything but Google Quicker and easier than "Draw the rest of the owl" and not outside anyone's control.
- kayodelycaon 2y ago
  Of course it’s easy for anybody on this forum to change their search engine. That’s the “thing”. The thing is always trivial to the person making the statement. The thing is completely irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make. The “just” is other people.
nunez 2y ago
"load-bearing just;" I love this term.

chiefalchemist 2y ago

> With a society, the resistance to change grows exponentially Yes and no. There's certainly the potential for a more flexible and adapt-minded culture for the same reason there's not... Human behavior. Yes, once norms are established they're slow to change but that's how the culture is nudged and "managed". It's not necessarily how humans arw hardwired. Eons ago, slow to adapt would mean certain death. Currently, fast to adapt labels you a rebel, a freak, an odd-ball, etc.

kayodelycaon 2y ago
> norms are established they're slow to change That is all I meant when I said society.
- chiefalchemist 2y ago
  And I'm saying that the current system is "optimized" by the powers that be to not change too fast. Humans have and can adept if they're allowed to do so. The current sociopolitical system doesn't allow this. The bottleneck to change isn't humans, it's the system.

abecedarius 2y ago

In this case it really is easy to try a different search engine and switch to it to the extent you prefer it. At least if you're not too uncomfortable using software.

xigoi 2y ago
Did you miss the “friends and family” part?
- abecedarius 2y ago
  Are you saying friends and family using Google are an obstacle to you using something else? Or maybe if you use something else, that makes you so uncool that your friends and family are not more likely to follow you, but actually less? I guess what you're actually getting at is that my switching doesn't automatically make my friends and family switch, but why insist that change only happen in blocks of people all at once? How does that help?
  - xigoi 2y ago
    The original comment was pointing out that in order to break the monopoly of Google, the wide society will need to switch to something else, not just a few tech-interested people.
    - abecedarius 2y ago
      The thing is, that kind of logic claiming the futility of individual action does not weaken the grandparent's advice. If you're an advertiser, you can't just switch from Google and hope to change anything. You'd be hurting yourself to no benefit, probably. Collective action is your main hope. It's not like this for users of search. Google can lose its search leadership one user at a time. When the user switches, "the problem is gone" for that user, and Google has that much less revenue. Gradient descent is powerful.
kayodelycaon 2y ago
Actually, that’s exactly my point. The “thing” is always trivial to the person making the statement. The “just” refers to ignoring that other factors are involved. If your personal goal is to convert X people to do something, you are accounting for it. If your goal is a specific call to action to have people voluntarily join you, you are accounting for it. If you’re stating a lot of people need to change, you’re acknowledging the scope of the problem. If you’re doing these things, you can make a difference. Go do the thing! Have others join you! If you say everyone should just do it and walk away thinking you have the solution to the problem, you don’t. :)

jqpabc123 2y ago

Settings | Search | Choose anything but Google Quicker and easier than "Draw the rest of the owl" and not outside anyone's control.

kayodelycaon 2y ago
Of course it’s easy for anybody on this forum to change their search engine. That’s the “thing”. The thing is always trivial to the person making the statement. The thing is completely irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make. The “just” is other people.

nunez 2y ago

"load-bearing just;" I love this term.