New here. I’m glad to see more people talking about scale/scope. Erik, I recommend you read up on Elinor and Vincent Ostrom and their work on Polycentricity. I find them increasingly prescient.
What if the cost of energy approaches close to zero (in the future) and AI begins to generate and execute ideas and improvements at an non-human rate? Do you think this perspective on balance and how to achieve it would shift. Do we then need the delicate balance of pushing people for excellence (so we get progress today) while not letting down large swatches of people?
“ However, we also don't want a society that runs entirely on Christian ethics. The Soviets tried that. Didn't work. ”.. not sure I’m getting this one. Which Christian ethics did they run on?
But social insurance only works in societies that are relatively homogenous and egalitarian (of ability).
I think that "broaden the franchise and human rights" was pretty much always the correct play in the western world for basically a millennia in terms of strengthening society, the people, and the state, but that it reached diminishing returns sometime after WW2 and especially when you consider globalization.
New here. I’m glad to see more people talking about scale/scope. Erik, I recommend you read up on Elinor and Vincent Ostrom and their work on Polycentricity. I find them increasingly prescient.
What if the cost of energy approaches close to zero (in the future) and AI begins to generate and execute ideas and improvements at an non-human rate? Do you think this perspective on balance and how to achieve it would shift. Do we then need the delicate balance of pushing people for excellence (so we get progress today) while not letting down large swatches of people?
"a society that runs entirely on Christian ethics. The Soviets tried that". What?? No, they didn't. Not even close.
“ However, we also don't want a society that runs entirely on Christian ethics. The Soviets tried that. Didn't work. ”.. not sure I’m getting this one. Which Christian ethics did they run on?
People like social insurance but not welfare.
But social insurance only works in societies that are relatively homogenous and egalitarian (of ability).
I think that "broaden the franchise and human rights" was pretty much always the correct play in the western world for basically a millennia in terms of strengthening society, the people, and the state, but that it reached diminishing returns sometime after WW2 and especially when you consider globalization.