3 ms·
True, the market doesn't care. However, I do. I just believe any given individual is less likely to be right that the market, as an emanation of the will of m
by guylhem 14y ago
True, the market doesn't care. However, I do.
I just believe any given individual is less likely to be right that the market, as an emanation of the will of many many people (at least on a statistical basis)
Traditionally, academia wants to work on the problems it deems worth its time. I don't like that - it's working on a fancy, on the public dime. My dime.
Working on the market dime on something the market fancies is totally different.
Sure, sometimes it may not be the most ambitious for the long term worth of the human race (so many social networks and ads placements out there), and sometimes the plans of specific individuals are better.
But if such individuals can be rewarded by the market for their previous efforts, they can then use their own money to work on their projects and ideas. They will even be rewarded again if they did something the market needed but didn't know it wanted.
Basically, I see that as doing real work (not in academia), and if this is successful, using the surplus you made to work on your fancies - because then, the kind of ideas you have and the kind of work you do have been validated by the market.
In any case, you are not spending the public money, and you are redeemable (you can be fired or run out of your own money) which discourages waste.
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoI just believe any given individual is less likely to be right that the market, as an emanation of the will of many many people (at least on a statistical basis) Markets only know what everyone knows. They are vulnerable to imperfect information, yes, and also mass delusions and hysterias of every sort.
- tripzilch 14y agoYeah. I can probably see that point of view, but I do disagree with quite a lot of the details--I believe a market works great in certain specific and relatively small scale circumstances, especially since it's a relatively effort-free system to set up, outside of those domains, the modus of "the market" seems to starts diverging more and more wildly from what I consider "good", or "to the benefit of those whose lives it affects"--but that becomes a philosophical discussion that might be a bit OT here. We can totally agree that academia's approach is similarly imperfect. > They will even be rewarded again if they did something the market needed but didn't know it wanted. Here you are conflating again "what the market needs/wants" with "good" > In any case, you are not spending the public money, and you are redeemable (you can be fired or run out of your own money) which discourages waste. That's not entirely fair reasoning. Just because what you describe here is the way a market discourages waste, doesn't mean that a different system like academia doesn't have its own ways in place to discourage waste. Which it does. And both systems have their fair share of examples where these methods fail spectacularly.