Floppy PNG7d ago"where in any given situation somebody might opt for a lazy easy way to solve a problem, piling on technical debt and complications which is a centralizing force as long as it doesnt kill the thing just yet" Good wording. The catch is how deep you go down in analysis on that. You crack that open a bit and start peering down, it goes down a long ways and crosses many more domains than most account for or think about. We are barely able to cognitively function as humans at this level of complexity (to your point).
💬 1 replies
Thread context
Root: 04635b7ca16d…
Replying to: 7891d16426ae…
Replies (1)
serapath【ツ】☮7d agoi dont know.
its maybe a bit od "epimetheus" vs. "prometheus", where one just does and thinks/learns later but at least makes some visible progress quickly, while the other wants to think it through upfront but takes forever until anything can happen at all.
now i just think a bit of both or whatever is one's tendency is okay, but we need actually do something at some point and cant wait forever and then learn and reflect again ... or we need to stop and think to revise at some point and cant be doing forever without ever reflecting at all.
So both models are just slightly different versions of a cyclic execution model anyway.
The point is, whether one wants to leverage in order to optimize towards centralization and power consolidation or not.
...and this is where motivations to keep thins complicated ON PURPUSE might enter the picture 🙂
0000 sats