That’s the whole point, though. The need to make things interpretable from the center is what it means to “see like a state.” A society doesn’t need to be interpretable to exist. Large groups of people can relate to one another peerwise.
The question is ill-posed imo. I would invert the question and ask: "How not to suck at your work" as that would lead to similar conclusions, and is more actionable.
This essay has too many weasel sentences like:
"Boldly chase outlier ideas,"
"Husband your morale"
"Doing great work is a depth-first search whose root node is the desire to. "
"Curiosity is the best guide."
This is woolly-feel-good writing that chatgpt and folks like steve pinker, deepak chopra etc specialize in, ie: a bag-of-words about fuzzy feel-good ideas we all want to hear.
Interests don’t stay in boxes. They grow tentacles that reach up and down the chain of production. They bump up against adjacent fields and they make the whole world look a little different. A single curiosity will evolve and change form over time. The beginning of it might not be boring to others, but if you take it far enough the end probably will be.
