Topsoil

Respectfully I think this is overly simplistic. Humans are a bunch of incompatible systems running on undocumented hardware. The biggest incompatibility is between hierarchy and egalitarianism, both of which are hardwired. You can, with some difficulty, apply a hierarchical lens to everything, but before too long you’re just doing epicycles.

Thanks for your comment. Founders, Boards of Directors, Senior VPs, VPs, Senior Directors, etc., it's all hierarchical, at Google too. Not the same as "command and control." All of Nature is this way. All of human society is this way, and for a reason. Much of this is explained in The Architecture of Complexity by Herbert Simon, 1962, and the Ur text is Exodus 18.

We've been thinking a lot at Stripe about the Coasean lens on AI: - The obvious near-term effect is reduced transaction costs within companies: shared context, systems of record, aligned incentives etc. - But inter-company transaction costs also reduce sharply: agents are great at discovery, make it trivially easy to integrate; make contracting much more straightforward; agent-to-agent commerce. - On net, we think second effect bigger in medium term: fewer people per firm, more output per firm, just more firms, and more coordination happening through market-like mechanisms

@DanSeligson @collision @Jon_Hartley_ In principle this sounds sus. Some firms eg Google have not historically operated hierarchically, and have been wildly successful.

@collision @Jon_Hartley_ Corporations work bc they are hierarchical, permitting coordination. The rules are what is coordinated. Rules without hierarchies can’t be enforced. Coase was off the mark, and institutional Econ followed. Paper up on SSRN.

@TimTrytitle @StatisticUrban @Empty_America Reminds me of a family lawyer who said “they ask me what happens to their children if they die. What do you mean if?” The point is, when the USA fades away, NYC will not. NYC is Lindy af.

If you mean only that people will continue to live in the same place sure, but that doesn’t seem to be what OP is talking about tbh. The former is likely true for many if not most places. But by saying NYC was in some sort of select, elite group of 5-10 cities, by virtue of its current prominence, I take that to mean that the city itself will endure in some type of way

I suspect NYC is old enough, rich enough, great enough by now to be immortal. Not immune to rise and fall, but immortal all the same. The great cities outlast their empires: Damascus, Paris, London, Baghdad, Beijing. Save for the true end, there will always be a New York City.

@CaptDarkMorning @GeorgeAylett OR - the left has no idea how to exercise power. Corbyn had no plan, no personnel, just beliefs. This is precisely the kind of person we don’t want in charge. And don’t forget - left wing people wielding power has a mixed record. Perhaps he was doing us a favour

@GeorgeAylett The big reveal of Corbyn’s leadership is we aren’t actually a democracy. Anyone left wing gets anywhere near power, and the entire establishment will activate to destroy them. And if they get through that, the next level is the US.

My PhD was on Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party. One mistake Corbyn made (which he has admitted) was trusting bad faith actors who ultimately were successful in damaging his leadership. Zack Polanski can, and must, avoid making the same (good faith) mistakes.

@technopopulist Or….build loads more houses and drive the landlords out of business that way. Like Churchill did in 1951.

Slum landlordism in London is far worse than most people realise. It is one of the most underreported scandals in Britain. Rogue landlords are treated with kid gloves because authorities do not want to make tenants homeless. That is understandable. But landlords know this and exploit it. This may sound drastic, but the state should use emergency prohibition orders far more aggressively. In the worst cases, it should take control of the properties and hand them to councils. Turn them into social housing. Once landlords know they can lose the asset, behaviour will change.

Right. So what you’ve accurately described is (1) all empires fall (2) cities endure. At some point the average New Yorker is going to have more in common with the average Roman than she does with citizens of whichever is the richest and most powerful city in the world. So it goes.

If you started a business, and grew it to making $ 2 million a year in profit, and it was worth $ 25 million, you would rightfully be pretty proud with what you did and content. If I told you in 50 years, Apple was going to be making only $ 2 million in profit, and be worth $ 25 million, you would basically think Apple had collapsed as a company and was functionally over compared to what it had been. Modern day Baghdadis have no living memory of their former relevance (hundreds of years ago) so their frame of reference has shifted, but if you told New Yorkers that in 200 years, their share of global gdp would go from 2.5% of the world to 0.04%, they would think that New York was pretty much dead at that time.

@TimTrytitle @StatisticUrban @Empty_America In what way?

@heftycharge @StatisticUrban @Empty_America Yes, I’m sure people in cities that have dramatically declined in prestige and relevance are happy, but the prior version of city is really no more.

@TimTrytitle @StatisticUrban @Empty_America Nah - the people who lived there would feel just as important as baghdadis do today. I’ve never met a damascene but I bet they’re equally humble. Certainly Romans, Istanbulites, Cairoans and Londoners are profoundly comfortable in their level of importance.

@StatisticUrban @Empty_America If New York was at the point of relative relevance that Damascus or Baghdad today, it would basically be dead

@StatisticUrban Cities are Lindy. New York will outlast the United States.

On the one hand - good to have a populist left wing party as a mirror to reform. On the other hand - the greens are just a populist left wing mirror to reform

@RossMcCaff “Slippery slope” - I’m pretty comfortable with sliding into “police stick up for themselves when criticized” - even if they turn out wrong.

Doesn't matter how wrong you think Polanski was, the Met Police Commissioner is either politically neutral or he isnt. This is a highly personal attack on a prominent politician a week before elections. Slippery slope

Ah good work - it’s reverso day is it? I mean - it is 1000% obviously the case that self driving vehicles are much safer, and that therefore the number of people using wheelchairs as a result of automobile crashes will reduce. You can deny it, but it’s a bit like denying nuclear power is low in CO2 emissions. It’s just saying wrong things to show solidarity with your thick mates.

@heftycharge That is utter nonsense.

London has required all new taxis to be wheelchair accessible since 1989. To allow anything else now would be a tremendous step back for accessibility.

@TuckerSaglio @Historycourses I knew a guy whose Ginsberg ancestor changed their name to Giness to sound Irish but not too Irish.

@Historycourses My uncle's family were originally Goldsteins until *his* uncle changed the spelling to "Galdston" because the uncle admired the British PM Gladstone but didn't quite want to go full Anglo.

Many are unaware of this, but in Jewish culture being stabbed is viewed as a greater indignity than being represented by a character named "Goldstein."

@Jamsnewpickle @bmay “Environmental” but also anti nukes and anti trains. So more “crusty nimby” than “environmental”

@bmay Trouble is, they are two parties, Momentum side and Eviromental side, unless they pick the issues with those two sides they are going for, you're probably right.

The Green Party will have splintered into internal but public warfare by this time next year. Bookmark it.

@lynnewhyte3 @bmay “Gaining traction” 🤣🤣🤣 - just like Corbyn “gained traction” in the 2017 election that he lost. Right? Right?

@bmay Why don't you Centerists pause for reflection as to why a progressive leader is gaining traction.

It’s an open secret in the Green movement that Polanski is primarily interested in the promotion of Polanski, that he’s a walking soundbite devoid of serious policy, high on his media profile but disconnected from voter reality. His flame will flicker out as fast as it sparked.

@AEthelswin @bmay Because he gave them their best chance for electoral success. Obvs.

@bmay Why was he ever selected as the party leader given that he only defected from the Lib Dem’s to the greens because the libs wouldn’t give him a safe seat?

@JENBROOK8 @bmay You can be member led and democratic AND delusional and disconnected from reality. What a time to be alive

@bmay "devoid of serious policy" 😂 Green policymaking is member led and democratic. It makes no sense for this alleged 'open secret' to be anything other than utter codswallop. 😂

@DarrenJohnson66 @bmay Relevant youtu.be/oEnNVBY8BdU?si… Polanski is the Farage of the left. Hopefully he’ll do as much at advance their cause.

@bmay Meanwhile serious, pivotal figures from the wider Green movement, like Katie White, are now Labour ministers busy implementing this government's clean energy revolution.

@lydiakauppi I have an Irish uncle who describes himself as a Catholic born again Christian

This is why I argue Catholicism is an ethnoreligion like Judaism and Islam. If you were born Catholic, you’re never not Catholic even if you’re not Catholic