Hacker News Reader

Comment by dasyatidprime | Hacker News Reader

“overlooks” doesn't seem right to me. He states within the first few paragraphs:

> It's obviously true that the returns for performance are superlinear in business. Some think this is a flaw of capitalism, and that if we changed the rules it would stop being true. But superlinear returns for performance are a feature of the world, not an artifact of rules we've invented.

You say “conventions” rather than “capitalism” here, but without more details it seems like you're targeting substantially the same distinction re social determination. So it sounds more like you disagree with him about that statement than that he just didn't take it into account.

View on HN

Any claim that superlinear returns for performance are a feature of the world and not of some rule set really needs to come with some strong supporting evidence.

“Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” ― Archimedes

Because everything in our history shows humans will exploit (i.e. fully utilize) leverage wherever they find it: labour, capital, technology, AI.

I don't think history shows that at all: In ancient Greece people did not go and exploit steam power beyond toy applications, for example.

Because everything in our history shows humans will hunt or forage for food when hungry.

> I don't think history shows that at all: In ancient Greece people fasted for weeks on end, for example.

Those folk in Greece playing around with steam power weren't going hungry. The claim was people exploit levers when they find them, I pointed to a situation were people weren't.

So in the situation in ancient Greece, if the situation was such that superlinear returns from steam power wasn't interesting, there is already a situation where social constructs stop that "law of nature".

And even if, hypothetically, humans were always exploiting levers, still need to show that superlinear returns are a feature of nature and cannot be blocked by any social construct (as they are not the results of rules).

By the way, even your food hunting thing is incorrect as such, as humans are known to willingly starve themselves to death.

The problem with broad and sweeping claims is, that they are easily debunked unless they are very carefully researched.

If there's money to be made. If not, not so much.

That's a fantastic quote though!

Did you see the unconventional events in the Middle East in the last few weeks? That demonstrates that while Paul may be usually correct, what he's describing is not fundamental.

The people running the show are well aware of such things and have them under control though so I wouldn't expect anything to change wrt distribution of fruits of labor in our part of the world...but the potential is always there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com