You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Konkvistador comments on How likely is Peter Thiel's investment into seasteading to pay off? - Less Wrong Discussion

14 [deleted] 30 August 2011 04:54PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (140)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 January 2013 03:44:07PM 0 points [-]

No I haven't. I will be putting it on my to reading list due to your recommendation though. Mind summarizing the content?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 03 January 2013 01:00:25AM 0 points [-]

It's a non-scholarly overview about the underlying social systems that the people in charge somewhat control. It includes informal resistance (slacking, poaching, wildcat strikes, riots) and says that formal resistance (unions, political action, revolutions) is frequently "leaders" surfing a wave they didn't create.

Scott says that visual order is not as closely related to making things work well as those in charge would like to think. There's a detailed description of African farming which looks sloppy to European eyes but is actually more effective at growing food-- not having the same kind of plant next to each other means fewer pests, and having the ground completely shaded by leaves means water is conserved. There's more about dictators wanting visual order and somewhat about how the aerial view leaves out how people actually live.

The most practical detail I saw was a strong recommendation that if you're evaluating nursing homes, then make sure to talk to the patients when the staff isn't present.

There's a chapter in favor of the petty bourgeois-- they have about as widely distributed ownership of the means of production as anyone's ever seen.

I hope this gives something of a feel of the book-- Scott's very reasonable-- he acknowledges that not all evil comes from centralization nor is decentralization reliably good, but too many people tip the balance farther in favor of centralization than it deserves.