On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 07:18:49PM +1000, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2019-09-19 11:39, Punk wrote:
lots of things can be done with little capital and no 'supervision'.
Lets see if you can make a pencil without a boss telling you how to do it.
"without a boss telling you how to do it" is in a real sense a sort of non-sequitor or irrelevancy. Why label the sharing of information, tutoring and/ or learning process as one involving "a boss"? If one or more sufficiently motivated individuals decide they need to make pencils, can employ their ability and creativity to learn and achieve many ends. Some things may be quite arcane, where very few have "the deepest knowledge", and other things may be very well guarded secrets - what the case is for pencil making IDK, but again, there's no need to lump learning processes with the overloaded word "boss". And, today's home hobbyist may turn out to be tomorrow's manufacturing powerhouse. We may not make a pencil or build a house, right the first time, but that can be part of the fun of living, learning, doing. It is perhaps just ingrained and well schooled thinking that leaves us holding to certain (outdated/ poverty conscious) ideas such as that "abundant commercial productivity is only possible with a boss" - that's far too general an assertion (or implication) and therefore ain't gonna hold water with any but shallow thinkers. Now, where is this "boss" concept useful or "an immoval object"? When a group of humans wishes to achieve an outcome dependent on that group, then coordination becomes very useful, perhaps vital even (depending on the outcome sought). A competent vision keeper. And when a group of humans wishes to work together frequently over time, interpersonal matters naturally arise, and someone capable of talking with those who find themselves having problems with one another may be vital to team cohesion and therefore actually achieving the outcome. A competent interpersonal arbiter/ communicator. And one human who successfully embodies both vision keeper and arbiter/ communicator, and has stamina/ persistence, and sufficient IQ for the complexity of the goal, would be a human worthy of holding in the position one might call "boss". At least, if you want to achieve the goal. There will always be hierarchies. But over time, the base of technology we can rely upon, advances (pending apocalypse of course), and so too therefore does the practical capacity of even one individual to manifest his visions, increase. Which means the goals we might set can be greater (inter-planetary travel looks like a worthy challenge for the most creative/ deepest thinkers today). Those who have great capacity on too many vectors have historically (apparently) been crucified. First hand experience of being told "intellectual capacity is a threat" by a close associate a few years ago, shocked me to the core - my inclination is to create, and give my creations away, and the ability to grok in ways to make certain creations as computer programs, requires a certain IQ (not necessarily high, but at least sufficient), and this capacity was actually named (by a low IQ associate/ friend), as a threat. Blew my mind. Gotta watch out - those of low capacity may view you as a threat and want to (literally) crucify you, even when you devote your life (seemingly) to "giving" "creating" "fixing" and "trying to help"! Strange humans in this world...