5 ms·

Feels like wherever you turn, you see a high-trust society disintegrating into a low-trust one.

Rygian 2y ago
To my untrained eye, this is a natural consequence of focusing on profit above all. So a natural consequence in cultures where such focus exists.
- Michelangelo11 2y ago
  Yeah, and maybe also a focus on grabbing all you can now, without regard for the future.
- tenpies 2y ago
  And yet, this has happened since we've been around. One of the most ancient examples of the written words we have is from a copper merchant complaining about the quality of the ingots he received[1]. The tablet could just as easily have been a complaint about the quality of honey purchased. This is a reversion to the mean. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nāṣir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nāṣir
  - aucisson_masque 2y ago
    I'd argue there is much more fraud with product coming from china than what is locally produced. Fraud always existed but now it's more prevalent than before, simply because some countries don't really try to enforce simple rules. For instance, Chinese mother refuse to buy powder milk in china since there has been so much fraud. Manufacturer put melamine (a plastic chemical) in powder milk for years to make them appear with more protein than reality, inducing kidney damage to newborn. That kind of thing doesn't happen in civilized society, this require a complete lack of morality and wide corruption.
  - diggan 2y ago
    Maybe Ea-nāṣir was also too focused on profits, thinking more about shareholder value than the customer.
- aithrowawaycomm 2y ago
  I'm increasingly convinced this switches cause and effect. Focusing on profit above all is a capitalist manifestation of an authoritarian zero-sum society; in state socialism it manifests as top-down anti-worker state focused on metrics and productivity. (In both cases a major problem is an absence of labor unions and formally independent oversight. People forget that Lenin killed workers who went on strike.) I get annoyed at "capitalism is bad for the environment" because it ignores the Soviets' environmental devastation, which was done in the name of improving society. The truth is that environmentalism is a distinct ideology from purely economic concerns, and it wasn't until the 60s that environmentalism became a left-liberal agenda item. I think it is similar with authoritarianism versus democracy. Democratic capitalists work for their workers; authoritarian capitalists work for their investors.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Just beware that plenty of people are pretending to be "Democratic capitalists" and saying they work for you and even do things that look very good - but the end result is not good for you. Even in the case someone is honestly trying to work for you uintended consequences of their actions can be worse for you.
- RHSeeger 2y ago
  My thought would be that it's as much the fact that society is growing. It used to be we'd buy our food from the producers of it. If it was bad, word would get around and the 10-50 people that were buying from them would stop; and they'd be out of business. Then society grew and we got local stores. And, while the same _idea_ was true, there was a lot more people and word didn't get around as much; so the impact was smaller. Then big stores, major chains, and you and your 100 friends that know something is bad... don't matter to them very much. Then online retailers and now nobody matters to them. If word they they're cheating people gets out, they change the name of their business and they're fine again. So sure, the pursuit of profits is impactful; but the lack of repercussions (when making choices that hurt others) is a pretty major player, too.
readthenotes1 2y ago
The phrase "a sucker born every minute" is not near as old as "caveat emptor" or "cui bono", but the constancy of viewpoint should have told you something
thwarted 2y ago
Rose colored glasses looking at the past. Nostalgia for something that never was.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  Exactly. Food purity and safety has probably never been higher. 100 years ago there was widespread adulteration and contamination of food, in addition to pure snake oil sold as beneficial medication.
  - foolfoolz 2y ago
    i don’t buy the low trust society model. i see improved awareness
  - rocqua 2y ago
    I could imagine more adulteration happening as globalization goes up, because traceability gets so much more difficult. Food safety has probably gone up over the past 30 years. But I suspect adulteration has too.
- mmooss 2y ago
  Do you have evidence of that? Things do change, and sometimes for the worse. PE squeezing hospitals, nursing homes, and rent is a new thing. Look at rents - the inflation of them is not something that happened in the past.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    The exact thing in question might be slightly different, but nothing is new. In the case of rents, the evil landlord raising rents and kicking people out is a trope you see in 1910s fiction. (probably before that, but I haven't personally read much fiction older than about 1910)
    - mmooss 2y ago
      > The exact thing in question might be slightly different, but nothing is new. I just don't see a reason to believe that. I've seen things change dramatically in my lifetime.
dannyobrien 2y ago
or better examinations revealing the ongoing challenges of societal co-operation to a wider audience
Aurornis 2y ago
Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. This stuff sticks out because it’s getting caught and called out. There was a time when information spread slowly, tracking supply chains was basically impossible, and many businesses would do shady things because they knew they were unlikely to get caught. Now we can sample things like honey with lab equipment that is basically magic compared to technology 50 years ago, so these things are getting caught. We also have the internet to share stories, so they’re getting seen. So while people are becoming more aware, I think these things are actually better than in the past.
- reaperducer 2y ago
  Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. You are correct. At least in the United States. There was a university agronomist on the radio a couple of weeks ago talking about how people get all worked up about food recalls. They act like there are more of them than ever before. She said the amazing thing is that there aren't more recalls, since we produce and consume so much food than ever with so much involved in the process. She says the system isn't perfect (no system ever is), but it's far better than what we've had in the past and the results are remarkable.
- Retric 2y ago
  It’s high trust in very specific ways. Walk into a supermarket and a box of X name brand whatever and it’s 99.99% guaranteed to be manufactured by the company it says on the box and be safe to consume no need for holographic stickers or whatnot. However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. An expensive restaurant is quite likely to be selling you fish when it says it’s fish but it may not be the correct species of fish etc etc. Eating at a random food truck is safe because we care a lot about safety, but let the buyer beware around just about anything else.
  - Aurornis 2y ago
    > However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. What is this supposed to mean? Every high value product I purchase is definitely unique to the company that makes it. My laptop, GPU, car, and phone are definitely not some rebranded items.
akira2501 2y ago
We used to sell _literal_ "snake oil" as a curative. What you may actually be witnessing is a low awareness society turn into a high awareness one. What is being highlighted is you never should have had that trust in the first place.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  And the funny thing is that the actual (or of you prefer, literal) snake oil, from Chinese water snakes, likely had at least some therapeutic properties. But much of what was sold as snake oil was itself adulterated (other animal oils, vegetable oils, or quite often, petroleum-based oil). Actual snake oil in the 1800s came from Chinese water snakes, and Chinese laborers who immigrated to the U.S. shared it with fellow workers as they helped build the transcontinental railroad. This type of snake oil, Pedersen says, was indeed an effective anti-inflammatory.... Enter the mysterious Clark Stanley in 1893.... Standing on stage in front of a growing crowd, Stanley pulled a rattlesnake out of a sack resting near his feet. In dramatic fashion, he slit the rattlesnake open with a knife, placed the snake in a vat of boiling water, and watched as its fat rose to the surface. Stanley sold his product, dubbed “Clark Stanley’s Snake Oil Liniment,” in liniment jars, boasting about its healing powers. Of course, Stanley’s snake oil was a marketing gimmick from the very start. Stanley's oil's actual ingredients: "mineral oil, beef fat, red pepper and turpentine". (Above article). His and others' deceptive practices lead to the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. <https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-snake-oil-became-a-symbol-of-fraud-and-deception-180985300/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-snake-oil-beca...> Wikpedia has more: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil>
cortesoft 2y ago
How would you distinguish that from a society that is slowly discovering long lasting frauds that have been going on for decades?
lijok 2y ago
> Feels like wherever you turn, you’re presented with negative narratives designed to maximize engagement Fixed that for you.

To my untrained eye, this is a natural consequence of focusing on profit above all. So a natural consequence in cultures where such focus exists.

Michelangelo11 2y ago
Yeah, and maybe also a focus on grabbing all you can now, without regard for the future.
tenpies 2y ago
And yet, this has happened since we've been around. One of the most ancient examples of the written words we have is from a copper merchant complaining about the quality of the ingots he received[1]. The tablet could just as easily have been a complaint about the quality of honey purchased. This is a reversion to the mean. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nāṣir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nāṣir
- aucisson_masque 2y ago
  I'd argue there is much more fraud with product coming from china than what is locally produced. Fraud always existed but now it's more prevalent than before, simply because some countries don't really try to enforce simple rules. For instance, Chinese mother refuse to buy powder milk in china since there has been so much fraud. Manufacturer put melamine (a plastic chemical) in powder milk for years to make them appear with more protein than reality, inducing kidney damage to newborn. That kind of thing doesn't happen in civilized society, this require a complete lack of morality and wide corruption.
- diggan 2y ago
  Maybe Ea-nāṣir was also too focused on profits, thinking more about shareholder value than the customer.
aithrowawaycomm 2y ago
I'm increasingly convinced this switches cause and effect. Focusing on profit above all is a capitalist manifestation of an authoritarian zero-sum society; in state socialism it manifests as top-down anti-worker state focused on metrics and productivity. (In both cases a major problem is an absence of labor unions and formally independent oversight. People forget that Lenin killed workers who went on strike.) I get annoyed at "capitalism is bad for the environment" because it ignores the Soviets' environmental devastation, which was done in the name of improving society. The truth is that environmentalism is a distinct ideology from purely economic concerns, and it wasn't until the 60s that environmentalism became a left-liberal agenda item. I think it is similar with authoritarianism versus democracy. Democratic capitalists work for their workers; authoritarian capitalists work for their investors.
- bluGill 2y ago
  Just beware that plenty of people are pretending to be "Democratic capitalists" and saying they work for you and even do things that look very good - but the end result is not good for you. Even in the case someone is honestly trying to work for you uintended consequences of their actions can be worse for you.
RHSeeger 2y ago
My thought would be that it's as much the fact that society is growing. It used to be we'd buy our food from the producers of it. If it was bad, word would get around and the 10-50 people that were buying from them would stop; and they'd be out of business. Then society grew and we got local stores. And, while the same _idea_ was true, there was a lot more people and word didn't get around as much; so the impact was smaller. Then big stores, major chains, and you and your 100 friends that know something is bad... don't matter to them very much. Then online retailers and now nobody matters to them. If word they they're cheating people gets out, they change the name of their business and they're fine again. So sure, the pursuit of profits is impactful; but the lack of repercussions (when making choices that hurt others) is a pretty major player, too.

readthenotes1 2y ago

The phrase "a sucker born every minute" is not near as old as "caveat emptor" or "cui bono", but the constancy of viewpoint should have told you something

thwarted 2y ago

Rose colored glasses looking at the past. Nostalgia for something that never was.

SoftTalker 2y ago
Exactly. Food purity and safety has probably never been higher. 100 years ago there was widespread adulteration and contamination of food, in addition to pure snake oil sold as beneficial medication.
- foolfoolz 2y ago
  i don’t buy the low trust society model. i see improved awareness
- rocqua 2y ago
  I could imagine more adulteration happening as globalization goes up, because traceability gets so much more difficult. Food safety has probably gone up over the past 30 years. But I suspect adulteration has too.
mmooss 2y ago
Do you have evidence of that? Things do change, and sometimes for the worse. PE squeezing hospitals, nursing homes, and rent is a new thing. Look at rents - the inflation of them is not something that happened in the past.
- bluGill 2y ago
  The exact thing in question might be slightly different, but nothing is new. In the case of rents, the evil landlord raising rents and kicking people out is a trope you see in 1910s fiction. (probably before that, but I haven't personally read much fiction older than about 1910)
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > The exact thing in question might be slightly different, but nothing is new. I just don't see a reason to believe that. I've seen things change dramatically in my lifetime.

dannyobrien 2y ago

or better examinations revealing the ongoing challenges of societal co-operation to a wider audience

Aurornis 2y ago

Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. This stuff sticks out because it’s getting caught and called out. There was a time when information spread slowly, tracking supply chains was basically impossible, and many businesses would do shady things because they knew they were unlikely to get caught. Now we can sample things like honey with lab equipment that is basically magic compared to technology 50 years ago, so these things are getting caught. We also have the internet to share stories, so they’re getting seen. So while people are becoming more aware, I think these things are actually better than in the past.

reaperducer 2y ago
Actually I think the opposite is true in many cases. Food quality and safety standards are higher than ever. You are correct. At least in the United States. There was a university agronomist on the radio a couple of weeks ago talking about how people get all worked up about food recalls. They act like there are more of them than ever before. She said the amazing thing is that there aren't more recalls, since we produce and consume so much food than ever with so much involved in the process. She says the system isn't perfect (no system ever is), but it's far better than what we've had in the past and the results are remarkable.
Retric 2y ago
It’s high trust in very specific ways. Walk into a supermarket and a box of X name brand whatever and it’s 99.99% guaranteed to be manufactured by the company it says on the box and be safe to consume no need for holographic stickers or whatnot. However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. An expensive restaurant is quite likely to be selling you fish when it says it’s fish but it may not be the correct species of fish etc etc. Eating at a random food truck is safe because we care a lot about safety, but let the buyer beware around just about anything else.
- Aurornis 2y ago
  > However, pick up a high value product and it’s likely to be some effectively identical fake while still being sold by the company it says on the box. What is this supposed to mean? Every high value product I purchase is definitely unique to the company that makes it. My laptop, GPU, car, and phone are definitely not some rebranded items.

akira2501 2y ago

We used to sell _literal_ "snake oil" as a curative. What you may actually be witnessing is a low awareness society turn into a high awareness one. What is being highlighted is you never should have had that trust in the first place.

dredmorbius 2y ago
And the funny thing is that the actual (or of you prefer, literal) snake oil, from Chinese water snakes, likely had at least some therapeutic properties. But much of what was sold as snake oil was itself adulterated (other animal oils, vegetable oils, or quite often, petroleum-based oil). Actual snake oil in the 1800s came from Chinese water snakes, and Chinese laborers who immigrated to the U.S. shared it with fellow workers as they helped build the transcontinental railroad. This type of snake oil, Pedersen says, was indeed an effective anti-inflammatory.... Enter the mysterious Clark Stanley in 1893.... Standing on stage in front of a growing crowd, Stanley pulled a rattlesnake out of a sack resting near his feet. In dramatic fashion, he slit the rattlesnake open with a knife, placed the snake in a vat of boiling water, and watched as its fat rose to the surface. Stanley sold his product, dubbed “Clark Stanley’s Snake Oil Liniment,” in liniment jars, boasting about its healing powers. Of course, Stanley’s snake oil was a marketing gimmick from the very start. Stanley's oil's actual ingredients: "mineral oil, beef fat, red pepper and turpentine". (Above article). His and others' deceptive practices lead to the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. <https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-snake-oil-became-a-symbol-of-fraud-and-deception-180985300/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-snake-oil-beca...> Wikpedia has more: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil>

cortesoft 2y ago

How would you distinguish that from a society that is slowly discovering long lasting frauds that have been going on for decades?

lijok 2y ago

> Feels like wherever you turn, you’re presented with negative narratives designed to maximize engagement Fixed that for you.