FAA actually tried moving to digital voice (has benefits wrt airband congestion) but it didn't go anywhere. I believe a lot came down to the minimal benefit over current solutions, plus the coordination and safety implications of actually making the switch. Tough for an FAA official to pull the trigger on a rollout that has even 0.1% chance of an aircraft crashing.
Some context, the average labeller on our platform puts in a single digit number of hours on our platform, works whenever and how much they want, and earn significantly more than an uber driver.
The manifesto had many disjointed themes, and some of the arguments Marc made seem intentionally inflammatory or oversimplified (and it has to be intentional polemicism, he's too smart -- and it's too on the nose -- for it to be an accident). (And if his goal was to create a stir, well, mission accomplished...the NYT ran two op-eds reacting to it.)
I was galvanized to focus on the deflationary part after reading an opinion piece that suggested that government price controls were more effective...
Hey, thank you for responding, it's cool to find the author here. Fundamentally, I mostly don't disagree with you. (I do wonder at his purpose.) I didn't read that piece, was it from one of the credentialed elite? There are 8 billion people in the world, if you read enough of their writing you'll see lots of bad ideas. Tuning out the noise is work.
The fact that better tech to do something drives down the cost of it is, to me anyway, almost tautological, that's part of the definition of better tech. There a 0-to-1 inflection point where something wasn't possible at all before, therefore the price was effectively infinite, but after that it's by definition better if it lowers all the costs that matter. Debates ensue when the financial cost is lower and the other costs get raised, which is usually the case. No one argues when the financial cost is same or lower, the pollution is demonstrably lower, and the performance is the same or better. Iphone assembly workers don't commit suicide as much as they once did, that's progress.
For some miltech, it functions similarly to consumer tech but doesn't break as easily, that's why it's better tech at 10x the financial cost of consumer tech.
Tech is tech. It doesn't solve people. If you wear eyeglasses, they are expensive because of people (monopolies, Luxxotica). Fundamentally, he was writing about people.
The first words of his are in a section titled "Lies". And one such "lie" is that technology threatens the environment. Yeah, show me miltech that doesn't?
I've been in the process of building a chrome extension to do exactly that. I've always wanted to work with browser tools so this is the perfect excuse haha.
