6 ms·

The damage caused by economic engineering leaves no good alternatives.

by skylan_q 13y ago

contingencies 13y ago
To be fair I think the whole world is facing the reality of increased efficiency requiring less bodies.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- maxharris 13y ago
  People are more than bodies - they all have minds, too. While the need for physical labor will continue to decrease, many things that require a human mind to do will still be in demand. The real question is, will we vote to allow those that choose to apply their minds the chance to actually try their ideas in reality? Look at what's happening to Airbnb. What kind of message does that send - "come up with a great new idea, one that provides value to hundreds of thousands, work as hard as you can for years, and watch it get crushed by regulations?" That is the biggest threat to everyone that wants to earn a better life for themselves in the future, not the "rise of the machines," which has only made us more productive, richer. Regulations are a major reason why everyone seems to focus on doing tech startups that don't get too far outside of computing. It's not just a random trend. When we let the best and brightest do their best, a lot more wealth will be created, and you'll see the standard of living start to increase again.
  - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
    With respect, the other reason tech-startups don't go too far outside computing are because that's what we know. Most hackers might have some domain expertise outside computing, but usually not enough to start a complete business in their secondary field of knowledge.
    - bad_user 13y ago
      I do not agree. Most hackers can learn the details of any domain-specific knowledge they want and many of them do so, especially those that are working in consulting. To be a good consultant and earn a reasonable monthly revenue, you have to able able to absorb domain-specific knowledge in a matter of days, or even hours and many people do so. The reason for why we aren't going outside computing is precisely because we'd have to deal with stupid regulations and barriers that have been placed to not upset the status quo, whereas computing and the Internet is the most unregulated industry by far. This is why those in power try their best to regulate the Internet and computing and why we get so upset whenever they try.
    - rdouble 13y ago
      Also, most other businesses are much more capital intensive. Starting a basic retail store or a bar or even franchising an existing restaurant requires a lot more money than starting a software startup.
clicks 13y ago
That is a pretty naive point of view. I think the exact opposite of what you posit is closer to the truth of things -- a more carefully planned economy would have resulted in better conditions. If China was straight up laissez faire capitalistic economy it would be a total mess right now. Read Albert Einstein's take on this, http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism for why and how (long read, but I promise it's worth it).
- maxharris 13y ago
  China tried a "carefully planned economy," for decades and it resulted in mass death, poverty, stagnation for hundreds of millions of people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward Einstein died before many of these crucial developments either had taken place, or were widely known in the West. Also, he was a physicist, not a philosopher or historian. He had neither the actual knowledge about the world nor a solid grounding in the humanities to guide his thought in that essay you cite. Before you say that someone has a "naive point of view," you might want to try reading just a little bit of history. And not just from Marxist/socialist authors. There are other perspectives out there, and you might find that they explain the facts of history better than your current view, if you only bother to look.
  - Daishiman 13y ago
    I'm in no way going to defend the Great Leap Forward, but governments can have policies that are better or worse irrelevant of ideology, and such policies can be developed and improved. In hindisight, despite the huge amounts of problems the Chinese society has (some of which are truly scary and may become emblems of future times), it cannot be denied that it is a country that has had a streak of massive, incredible growth and has hoisted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. This does not contradict the fact that the same government had such massive failures in the past. I abhor the current Chinese state, but I really, really doubt that Western Capitalism would have been half as effective, at the very least not without costing the Chinese a huge relinquishment of capital and corporations in the hands of foreign interests, not a favorable position to be in. You can't implement certain policies without having absolute control of some parameters.

The damage caused by economic engineering leaves no good alternatives.

contingencies 13y ago

To be fair I think the whole world is facing the reality of increased efficiency requiring less bodies.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
maxharris 13y ago
People are more than bodies - they all have minds, too. While the need for physical labor will continue to decrease, many things that require a human mind to do will still be in demand. The real question is, will we vote to allow those that choose to apply their minds the chance to actually try their ideas in reality? Look at what's happening to Airbnb. What kind of message does that send - "come up with a great new idea, one that provides value to hundreds of thousands, work as hard as you can for years, and watch it get crushed by regulations?" That is the biggest threat to everyone that wants to earn a better life for themselves in the future, not the "rise of the machines," which has only made us more productive, richer. Regulations are a major reason why everyone seems to focus on doing tech startups that don't get too far outside of computing. It's not just a random trend. When we let the best and brightest do their best, a lot more wealth will be created, and you'll see the standard of living start to increase again.
- eli_gottlieb 13y ago
  With respect, the other reason tech-startups don't go too far outside computing are because that's what we know. Most hackers might have some domain expertise outside computing, but usually not enough to start a complete business in their secondary field of knowledge.
  - bad_user 13y ago
    I do not agree. Most hackers can learn the details of any domain-specific knowledge they want and many of them do so, especially those that are working in consulting. To be a good consultant and earn a reasonable monthly revenue, you have to able able to absorb domain-specific knowledge in a matter of days, or even hours and many people do so. The reason for why we aren't going outside computing is precisely because we'd have to deal with stupid regulations and barriers that have been placed to not upset the status quo, whereas computing and the Internet is the most unregulated industry by far. This is why those in power try their best to regulate the Internet and computing and why we get so upset whenever they try.
  - rdouble 13y ago
    Also, most other businesses are much more capital intensive. Starting a basic retail store or a bar or even franchising an existing restaurant requires a lot more money than starting a software startup.

clicks 13y ago

That is a pretty naive point of view. I think the exact opposite of what you posit is closer to the truth of things -- a more carefully planned economy would have resulted in better conditions. If China was straight up laissez faire capitalistic economy it would be a total mess right now. Read Albert Einstein's take on this, http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism for why and how (long read, but I promise it's worth it).

maxharris 13y ago
China tried a "carefully planned economy," for decades and it resulted in mass death, poverty, stagnation for hundreds of millions of people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward Einstein died before many of these crucial developments either had taken place, or were widely known in the West. Also, he was a physicist, not a philosopher or historian. He had neither the actual knowledge about the world nor a solid grounding in the humanities to guide his thought in that essay you cite. Before you say that someone has a "naive point of view," you might want to try reading just a little bit of history. And not just from Marxist/socialist authors. There are other perspectives out there, and you might find that they explain the facts of history better than your current view, if you only bother to look.
- Daishiman 13y ago
  I'm in no way going to defend the Great Leap Forward, but governments can have policies that are better or worse irrelevant of ideology, and such policies can be developed and improved. In hindisight, despite the huge amounts of problems the Chinese society has (some of which are truly scary and may become emblems of future times), it cannot be denied that it is a country that has had a streak of massive, incredible growth and has hoisted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. This does not contradict the fact that the same government had such massive failures in the past. I abhor the current Chinese state, but I really, really doubt that Western Capitalism would have been half as effective, at the very least not without costing the Chinese a huge relinquishment of capital and corporations in the hands of foreign interests, not a favorable position to be in. You can't implement certain policies without having absolute control of some parameters.