Советские, антисоветские

[timelets]

We can think of socialism (S) and capitalism (C) as isomorphic algebras for allocating rival/tangible assets with different rules/institutions, e.g. command vs . market). The C algebra leads to more efficient allocations, i.e. produces higher output. Done.

What happens when assets become intangible/non-rival, i.e. infinitely scalable? Both algebras fail, although in different ways. Smart entities (individuals, companies) capable of appropriating such assets get incredible advantages in winner-takes-all markets. As Peter Thiel puts it, "competition is for suckers."

Comments

[lxe]

Appropriation of (e.g.) the number 3 requires a very special algebra indeed.

[timelets]

Exactly. It's called numeracy. Some people have it; some don't and never will.

[lxe]

That's quite different from the vocabulary definition of "appropriation".
- no one's ability of numeracy is infinitely valuable on its own w/o infinite computational power.
- no actor can possess the ability of numeracy exclusively without being infinitely powerful.
- no product of numeracy stays in exclusive possession w/o (powerful enough) non-market restrictions imposed on propagation of technology.

[timelets]

DOI: 10.1126/scirobotics.aat1228
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1126/scirobotics.aat1228

Figure 2B.

[lxe]

So?
Does it mean that a particular actor can monopolize the supply of multitasking performance?
Does it mean that a particular actor can monopolize the supply of multitasking performers?

[timelets]

I'm not sure about what you are asking.

From my point of view 1) half of the people become largely useless in a three-arm world because they can't learn a new mental skill; 2) it doesn't make sense to invest into the three-hand world, unless you can monopolize some aspects of it, e.g. algorithms/equipment for multitasking performance.

[lxe]

Oh IC.
I was originally assuming your concern was about the possibility of an unlimited and unbreakable monopoly, as if a particular actor could become the sole supplier of a certain resource "mana" that everyone else would substantially depend upon.
That is not and would not be the case, at least unless the ridiculous legal framework that allows "privatization of the number three" goes full Hitler.
If that's not the case, competition still exists and no one is free from it. For every three-armer, there are other three-armers to compete against, so no one gains an unlimited advantage. Furthermore, according to the law of comparative advantage, exploitation of specialized skills boosts demand for complementary skills, no matter how petty the latter appear to a naked eye. We have had it with the existence of strong and weak people, good and bad warriors, the concentrated and the attention deficient, name the rest.

Moments ago I came to the office and met three ladies doing the cleaning. They left and I stayed.
I have not been able to achieve comparable perfection since college dorm living; I'll probably die before I do.

[timelets]

The cleaning ladies live in a two-arme world. You live in a three-arm world; your third arm is a vast networked computer. Your company has a monopoly on your code.

[lxe]

The cleaning ladies live in a two-arme world.

This is as much an advantage as being physically strong, resistant to aggression, or concentrated; a comparative advantage among other comparative advantages.

Your company has a monopoly on your code.

This is the actual problem. If you don't mind, that's what I have been calling "privatization of the number three" since the beginning of our discussion.
I agree this is neither a characteristic feature of "S" nor a characteristic feature of "C".
This is a framework inherited from "AR" ("Ancien Regime").
It's a gross omission that it managed to survive the Bill of Rights.

Without that framework, any advantage in understanding is temporary.

[timelets]

At least we agree on something :)

[lxe]

Smile or not, it's a shame we don't have a Pirate party here. We have Eric Raimond, the EFF, a constellation of technoanarchy activists, but that's it.
I'd vote Pirate against Republican in a two-party system for the same reason I'd vote R against D.

[lxe]

P.S. I am not completely confident about the exact breakdown of the "third-arm" skill.
If there is any substantial correlation between engineering skills, including engineering of scalable multitasking processes, and personal ability to concentrate on multiple tasks, it must be negative.
As of myself, I am most productive in single-threaded mode.
Home reading: https://www.amazon.com/Quiet-Power-Introverts-World-Talking/dp/0670916757/