= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
orthonormal comments on The cup-holder paradox - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (78)
Who's going to give an auto designer any credit for a completely boring and obvious idea like "larger cupholders"? The incentives are almost certainly in the direction of affiliating oneself with higher-status design changes (satellite radio, integration with apps and Internet, etc) rather than lower-status ones.
Point. (See, that's an actual explanation and not just a generic appeal to insanity.)
What?
Capitalism doesn't work by reputation- if I develop a feed formula for cows that makes their shit more beneficial as a fertilizer, then Monsanto and others will beat a path to my door. (Unless they steal it, but same thing.)
The incentives come from money, and as Vespasian said, "Pecunia non olet." (Money does not stink)
If you're talking about someone working for a large company and designing something mundane but better, the incentives may be more diffuse, but I don't believe that lost purposes are so terribly entrenched that the incentive is effectively invisible.
In my personal experience, designers/innovators working for companies are never rewarded for making their company more money. Sometimes their bosses are. My boss got a $20,000 bonus when I saved NASA $40 million.