>But could massive institutions be reformed continuously by fixing every problem carefully à la Chesterton's Fence ? I think not:
I do think so. But we need proper leaders voted in first. We've been quite horrible at that, to be frank. But I guess it represents us: a political gridlock too busy fighting each other (often o petty issues) to proper come together and identify what's actually wrong in our lives.
> See Europe's fossilization, accelerated by the fact that we have put an administration of bureaucrats over countries to add one layer of rules
you mean the institution where a bad fall doesn't put you in debt? That mandate 30 days vacation a year? that doesn't just roll over and let technocrats steal and sell your data without consent?
Yea, caring for one another is such a fossilized concept.
>I'd love a DOGE in Eurppe because our administrations can only be cut brutally, like the Gordian knot. That may destroy some good things, but I'll happily pay that to get rid of the bad things.
I'll put this in your language: you're esssentially trying to make a proposal to a business to shut down its main product while your engineering team takes time to make a new, efficient product that guarantees a 10x ROI.
Now, maybe there's a chance you're right. But there's no way in high hell any business would ever agree to that. You may be willing to pay, but you're not the only one paying. That reboot will lose shareholder value, piss off and permanently turn off customers, and may even make you vulnerable to security breaches. It makes no sense.
Meanwhile, we can simply revisit our lovely fence and start things off the right way. You can make your own module and show how efficient it is before deprecating the old one. and you repeat that until you fully optimized the legacy code. There was no shutdown, you worked incrementally to prove your changes worked, and satisfied customers along the way. That's all I'm suggesting for such an "efficiency" process here.
> Yea, caring for one another is such a fossilized concept.
Do not conflate "being efficient" that I was suggesting, and "being mean" that I never suggested. I don't think that social security is a bad concept. And anyway we'll probably all need UBI when AIs are more efficient than us at everything.
Btw, conflating these two concepts of "efficient" and "mean" is one of the roots of Europe's fall.
> You can make your own module and show how efficient it is before deprecating the old one.
Are you suggesting doing A/B testing with laws? Maybe you were trying again to "put this in [my] language", but your proposal sounds delusional. A country's not a product, you can't have two parallel versions.
I do think so. But we need proper leaders voted in first. We've been quite horrible at that, to be frank. But I guess it represents us: a political gridlock too busy fighting each other (often o petty issues) to proper come together and identify what's actually wrong in our lives.
> See Europe's fossilization, accelerated by the fact that we have put an administration of bureaucrats over countries to add one layer of rules
you mean the institution where a bad fall doesn't put you in debt? That mandate 30 days vacation a year? that doesn't just roll over and let technocrats steal and sell your data without consent?
Yea, caring for one another is such a fossilized concept.
>I'd love a DOGE in Eurppe because our administrations can only be cut brutally, like the Gordian knot. That may destroy some good things, but I'll happily pay that to get rid of the bad things.
I'll put this in your language: you're esssentially trying to make a proposal to a business to shut down its main product while your engineering team takes time to make a new, efficient product that guarantees a 10x ROI.
Now, maybe there's a chance you're right. But there's no way in high hell any business would ever agree to that. You may be willing to pay, but you're not the only one paying. That reboot will lose shareholder value, piss off and permanently turn off customers, and may even make you vulnerable to security breaches. It makes no sense.
Meanwhile, we can simply revisit our lovely fence and start things off the right way. You can make your own module and show how efficient it is before deprecating the old one. and you repeat that until you fully optimized the legacy code. There was no shutdown, you worked incrementally to prove your changes worked, and satisfied customers along the way. That's all I'm suggesting for such an "efficiency" process here.