"Time to revisit the concept of ownership? Taking responsibility for stewardship seems a good thing. Using it to coerce others, perhaps not so good. Manage an entity for the benefit of owners? What of the privilege bestowed on some by society (or even markets). Qualifiers should be required. In programmer parlance, require a qualifier in the call. Without the hazard of accountability. Too many train wrecks, it seems.
"Competition needs a review too? With limited scope it seems a good thing, the best emerges because there is a real-time measure of performance. Without adequate limitations - hubris and destruction can, and often do, reign. Moving the goal posts during the contest is clearly unfair. Even worse if one of the participating teams is doing it.
"Friendly agreements on rules have served on a smaller scale in the past. But they have not scaled with the exploding demand of connectedness and dwindling frontiers. New stuff to the rescue! In its early stages, where experiments can go awry more frequently, a new human capacity for large scale friendship emerging. The nation-state model has been of limited usefulness as indicated by the size and frequency of destructive conflicts. And certainly not the first time, something emerges just in time. You are seeing its evidence as you read this."
This missive nailed it. Over generalization, while always a hazard, is particularly risky when virtually reversing causation flow. One could reasonably argue her gender made her adept at this so he was particularly thankful these early musings were easily accessible. Yes, he felt upstaged, or a least his primitive instinct did. He could rationalize that this little excursion would be conducive to their upcoming discussion, humor to lighten the mood.
No comments:
Post a Comment