141–150 of 924 posts
This is the key point. So many debates about "more X" vs. "less X" when what we mostly need is "better X". Anti-Covid measures; almost any sort of "security"; government programs of all sorts. And, yes, very much regulation.
Scott Alexander has had some nice riffs on this theme, though I can't come up with a specific link at the moment.
This article is profoundly insightful. I have been searching for patterns and insights in this field for 25 years. What apenwarr concludes is true: All we need is to build distributed systems that work. That means decentralized bulk activity, hierarchical regulation. The problem is, everyone wants distributed systems that require everyone else to agree (global consensus), which is literally impossible (see: CAP theor…
No. What he's saying is that there are 'distributed' aspects like two people deciding on a price for something. Not everyone has to agree on that price and that's fine! That's how markets work.
But we do need rules like if I give you money for something and then you tell me to get lost... that I have some recourse. Everyone needs to roughly agree to those rules.
It seems to me that it's a little bit of hubris to have human's running the Federal Reserve and setting monetary policy. It seems like the economy is this massive system with virtually infinite moving parts that no one truly understands and the people at the fed just continue to poke it with a stick.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By every measurable metric, Humanity has gotten better. Longer lifespan, lower child mortality, better education, easier access to basic life neccessities and goods, (ironic to say at this time but yes even) better health, etc etc etc. We live in an age where every problem is weaponised and we are hyperaware of the problems now so that we don't see all the progrees that is done. https://www.openculture.com/2020/05/16…
>By every measurable metric Every measurable metric? How about median wealth? How about levels of debt? How about job satisfaction? How about median income per household? Per person? How about access to healthcare and cost? How about suicide rates? How about drug overdose rates? How about corruption? How about cost of higher education? How about homelessness? I mean cmon, you're looking at thing with rose colored gla…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Length of life and comfort don't mean much once you reached the bare minimum. If you have running water, central heating, a mattress and own any kind of motorised vehicle you live a more comfortable life than any medieval king. So yeah, sure, we have netflix, smart bulbs and food delivery. Can you sustain a family as easily as your grandparents ? Will you retire as early as them ? Will you acquire an house as easily…
There's an old bluegrass song called "I'll Fly Away," the music is very happy and upbeat. When you listen to the lyrics, you realize it's a slave song about how the narrator is looking forward to death so they can escape the horrible life they are living. The point of that is just because we live longer doesn't mean we live better.
Excuse me for the dismissive tone, but this looks a dog chasing his tail. Does anyone REALLY believe that "things don't work"™ because the systems put in place are flawed? No sir, the systems in place work flawlessly for those who put them there, enjoy the benefits of those systems and make damn sure these systems keep benefiting them no matter what. As long as one doesn't acknowledge this very simple fact, they have…
Bingo. Those in power by definition can change the system, but they don't. Which probably means it's working pretty well for that cohort. But one thing you are missing is that those in power are just like us. Deeply flawed people and what they build is flawed for their purposes too. Global warming is a great example. They have absolutely no solution to it and it will decimate not just them, but everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"There's another word for "require everyone else to agree": Tyranny." I think this is often thrown out there to push back on liberals and socialism but this is the wrong point. We as a global society _need_ to agree to be productive. We need to work together to find the best solutions for as many people as possible. Everyone needs to agree that starting a nuclear war is bad. You would likely want to stop China from s…
I've never seen anyone else define conservative vs liberals like that. Conservatives aren't against rules, they are against changing rules. Why are conservatives against abortion, gay marriage and drug legalisation if they don't want to be told what they can do on their "own 200 acre farm". All those issues are about enforcing a worldview on others .
That doesn’t ring true to me. Both liberals and conservatives want to change and preserve rules according to their viewpoints.
Although I guess you could argue that the text itself is less important than the impression it made on people who read it...
>Centrally planning a whole society clearly does not work (demonstrated, bloodily, several times). I really, really hate this argument. If it's true, why does the CIA feel the need to destabilize countries with centrally planned markets? Why has China been so successful despite what is widely believed to be a failed premise? Central planning works as well as unplanned markets work: That is, sometimes they work, somet…
> Why has China been so successful despite what is widely believed to be a failed premise?
They're successful as an economy, not as a society (obv, using my metrics.)
This article is profoundly insightful. I have been searching for patterns and insights in this field for 25 years. What apenwarr concludes is true: All we need is to build distributed systems that work. That means decentralized bulk activity, hierarchical regulation. The problem is, everyone wants distributed systems that require everyone else to agree (global consensus), which is literally impossible (see: CAP theor…
> That means decentralized bulk activity, hierarchical regulation. Interestingly, he also mentions that central economic planning doesn't work (although I am not so sure I completely agree with that thesis), but this sounds very similar to Cybersyn's design.