2/ Incrementalism works when you have a problem for which a solution moves towards a better *and stable* position in socio-technical space. If it's unstable, then the energy expended getting there may be for nothing — absent radical change, systems tend to revert.
-
-
Show this thread
-
3/ But the slow-accrual of stable incremental changes does create new metastable points, too! That's the incremental change ideal. Except, they often feel (and are) painfully slow.
Show this thread -
4/ So then I end up wanting the radical change. Rip out everything from the roots and try to grow something new and better. Otherwise some states remain inaccessible by small gradient traversals — you need long jumps. Except, hysteresis tends to damn those changes, too.
Show this thread -
5/ It comes down to identifying how much social energy there is to adopt a set of solutions; how likely they are to be stable given adoption; and, the consequences on the system at large. Which is hard or impossible to determine... ...hence the desire for a singular heuristic.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.