"Possible" is also contextual; it's relative to the surrounding ecosystem, available time/resources, and team skills 6/
-
-
For example, a lot of 2000-era meta-ideas about open source governance were based on ideological shortcuts 18/
-
"You can build an issue tracker, but it's hard" "You need a mailing list for communication" 19/
-
"It's hard to verify that releases work, so we should release slowly after long verification and QA" 20/
-
That led to the idea that open source projects need to be housed in large foundations 21/
-
These ideas made sense at the time (running a CI server for a utility library would have been a ridiculous waste of resources) 22/
-
But it's important to retain the original chain of reasoning for the ideology ("OSS projects should use infra provided by a foundation") 23/
-
By retaining (or recovering) the chain of reasoning, we can periodically check whether the costs are still worth the benefits 24/
-
To be clear, the OSS example is just an example. There are many more. 25/
-
In practice, instead of remembering that ideologies are fixed-point-in-time shortcuts for a given tradeoff 26/
-
And that derived ideologies are on even more brittle ground 27/
-
Instead, we form tribes around the ideologies that actively resist revisiting the rationale 28/
-
And instead of treating derived ideologies as especially suspect (the more derived the more suspect) 29/
-
We treat them as litmus test for membership in our tribe 30/
-
None of this means we can't adopt shortcuts for the current state of things 31/
-
In fact, it's important that we are allowed to do so in order to avoid our entire life becoming a series of meta-debates 32/
-
But we should treat them as shortcuts and nothing more 33/
-
And we should revisit our third, fourth and fifth order ideologies very regularly 34/
-
There's a good chance that some part of the chain of reasoning will change sooner than you think 35/
-
The diff between the drag on progress caused by opaque ideologies and the acceleration caused by transparent ones is orders of magnitude 36/
-
Just like compound interest, the different magnifies and accelerates. 37/
-
Finally, while tradeoff calculations can change in a blink, human infrastructure cannot 38/
-
One of the benefits of ideological shortcuts is that you can build more infra around them that lets a society or tribe work productively 39/
-
But these abstractions, which work beautifully for the fixed point, degrade over time and eventually fail competitively 40/
-
We need to use these shortcuts to build abstractions, but groups built around them need to revisit them regularly 41/
-
And then, they must help each other migrate in a way that doesn't cause upheaval and that preserves as much shared value as possible 42/
-
Change is inevitable, and that makes the process of adapting to in inevitable as well 43/
-
One approach is to resist ideological shortcuts and examine every problem by doing the full cost calculus 44/
-
But this is incredibly expensive and isn't competitive with newer groups that operate on relatively recent ideologies 45/
-
Because they get the benefit of the shortcuts and you don't 46/
-
Instead, we have to 1. create shortcuts but remember their chain of reasoning 46/
- 25 more replies
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.