Manaén pfp

Manaén

@mana

31 Following
74 Followers
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
I don’t think you user the right example 😝 The fast train depicted is a German train. Almost always late, waaaay too expensive (it is cheaper to travel back and forth in a car alone than do a one-way trip anywhere), and uncomfortable as fuck. An experience I wish on no one.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
yes, but … DON’T BEND THE PAGE 😭
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
Most of current projects serve as proofs of concept, but, from my pov, none really satisfies the definition of a network state. Is anyone out there building a network state that considers and treats its citizens as “customers”?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
And, yet again, I am reminded how fundamental purpose is to any network state. Currently, we are seeing many shovel sellers (which is good). But I am really looking forward to those who will dig out the gold and build actual network states driven by one commandment (which is better).
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
I attended the Network State Conference last time in Amsterdam. Streaming it right now reminded me of why I am doing what I am doing and what it will become. Thanks, @balajis.eth for streaming it and making this content accessible.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
The reason you don’t have these rituals in the US and other countries is because most of them have and use central ventilation systems or more-or-less open architecture where the climate allows. German architects sell passiv ventilation with no need to open windows as a feature and charge extra. 🤷‍♂️
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
Specialists or domain experts are the least trustable sources, more so if they are academics. Why? Because, to become a specialist today, you have to a) find an obscure niche worth being an expert in, to, then, b) to inoculate yourself and your mind from reality to be able to sustain and entertain your expertise. The problem is that such kind of inoculation from reality blinds you to the fact that your idea could never withstand the test of reality. Your expertise is, contrary to common sense, a tree with a well developed crown (you academic credentials) but shallow roots (grounding in real life experiences).
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
what makes this more sad is how some EU optimists read this as a testament of our potential, rather than our idiocy. Almost like in a delirium.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
real optimists believe in their own ability to exploit their capabilities. faux optimists delegate the responsibility to exploit their own capabilities to someone else.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
This is the kind of toxic takes I see on X: People just complaining how a platform exerts a mysterious power over them and robs them their agency. Don’t do it here, unless you want others to feel the same you feel on X.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
a custom build one for you should be one that says bs to everything as default reaction 😆
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
can you explain what you mean with “following Plato”?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
is not so much about investment into market mechanism but about ensuring that those who want to have free access to it.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
This is news to me. But I am not Catholic but Protestant. We Protestants have a differing view on the role of the market and materiality, to start with. In the Calvinistic tradition, for example, the market place is the platform where you can display your pious lifestyle as hint to your status of salvation, not through (exhuberant) consumption but through productive efforts and the (generous) re-investment of the surplus you generate. You could say that Protestants believe in the redemption of time/money/anything material by dedication to a greater purpose. The studies of Max Weber on modern capitalism and the protestant ethic is one of the seminal and grounding/founding works of empirical sociology. It would not surprise me, though, if Catholics would, then, try to differ from a Protestant point of view. 😆
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
nope. I would rather say, if universal truths exist, than God is definitely in the realm of possibilities, at least not excludable.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
on the contrary! I am a devote Christian, but my faith compels me to give people freedom of choice, as the creator did, rather than pre-determining what they should want —even in cases where I am convinced I know better.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
Hence, my “oversimplification” that the arrogance to even attempt to define categories such as “common” “goods”, ultimately either expresses your socialist identity or turns you to a socialist since there is only one way to realise those ideals: Having people with the “right” mindset build and control the institutions capable of suppressing individual freedoms. What about the right to pursue happiness and satisfaction in life? We know that satisfaction and happiness require struggle. But what if struggling was not included in the definition of the common goods? What about entrepreneurial pursuits or the American Dream? Both require the individual freedom to disagree with the definition of what a common good is in order to pursue a better. etc. I guess you get my point.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
Another problem I have with the common “goods” approach is the moral a priori. It is out of the bound of science to decide what is a good or a bad. The definition of common goods presupposes an agreement on what everyone must have. I, for myself, studied poverty and am a big fan of Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach and multidimensional poverty measurement since it forces the researcher to make his moral assumptions explicit. Hence, his research is only as valuable as the reader agrees with his terms. Moreover, Sen’s theory on justice offers a better approach to common wealth by trying to minimise injustice while maintaining maximum degrees of individual freedoms. In contrast, Rawl’s approach is to define the good society first, and then build the institutions that take as much control as necessary to be able to realise that ideal. This is the pursuit of Utopia. I count the common goods approach among the latter.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
It certainly is an accusation, but evil needs to be named and ousted. Feeling attacked only reveals that there is an identification on the recipient’s side, i.e., guilty by self-identification. Simpllifications are a necessity since all we do is create “oversimplistic” models of the world we need to navigate. Plus, why would I need to study a certain branch of (socio-)economics to be able to form and proclaim my own views? But, yes, I studied sociology, welfare states, and the likes and already disagree with the premise that goods can be common. I would prefer a radical individual ownership/responsibilty approach. The notion of common goods is only in so far compatible with free markets as you see the necessity of the state to regulate them, which is a krass contradiction to the “free” part. What I’m thinking a lot about is how Milei put it while at Stanford earlier this year: Do you know of any example of market failure that was not preceded by government intervention/regulation?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Manaén pfp
Manaén
@mana
I am sorry to be the one to break it to you, but if you do not believe that profit = common good, you are either an arrogant brat, a socialist or, most probably, both.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions