Your view seems reasonable enough on its own terms. The reason I’m being a bit naggy in the comments here is because I’ve got my own pet framework, which has some claim to being the next step after yours in terms of improving life outcomes
Valentine isn’t a hedgehog about this framework. The point of calling it a fake-framework is to make it clear that it isn’t the one-framework to explain everything. Given that frameworks are useful intuition pumps having multiple useful frameworks allows you to generate more useful ideas.
Not all value exchange is about market-based trading. David Ronfeld lays out Tribes/Hierarchies/Markets/Networks in “In Search of How Societies Work”.
When I ask on StackExchange a question I don’t think it’s helpful to think of how I trade with the person who will answer my question.
It’s more useful to think in terms of roles. There are certain cultural exceptions by the StackExchange community and when I write StackExchange answers it’s more useful to think about living up to those norms than thinking about how to trade with people answering.
StackExchange follows network norms of value creation.
Huh? StackExchange has karma! So does LW. The value exchange mechanism is exposed for all to see. Reputation systems are designed markets. They also complement goods markets (Amazon, eBay, Yelp). And there’s intermediate cases like social media, where companies promote their content by making it upvote-worthy. Thinking that you do stuff to follow norms misses the point: you follow norms to make a profit.
Popper made the point that one of the problems with Marxism is that the Marxist has no problem to see any conflict as being about class struggle. In the same way you can see every problem as being about market and fit them into that perspective.
On StackExchange you find bad question and answer getting downvotes even when that costs the people who downvote karma. You wouldn’t expect that behavior to happen as often it it would be a market where participants purely optimize for getting their questions answered, earning karma and badges.
People desire to do work on StackExchange that doesn’t bring them karma. People work through review queues even when that doesn’t bring them karma to help the project.
If you start to look at a problem with multiple lenses you see more aspects of it and that helps generating new solutions.
Valentine isn’t a hedgehog about this framework. The point of calling it a fake-framework is to make it clear that it isn’t the one-framework to explain everything. Given that frameworks are useful intuition pumps having multiple useful frameworks allows you to generate more useful ideas.
Not all value exchange is about market-based trading. David Ronfeld lays out Tribes/Hierarchies/Markets/Networks in “In Search of How Societies Work”.
When I ask on StackExchange a question I don’t think it’s helpful to think of how I trade with the person who will answer my question.
It’s more useful to think in terms of roles. There are certain cultural exceptions by the StackExchange community and when I write StackExchange answers it’s more useful to think about living up to those norms than thinking about how to trade with people answering.
StackExchange follows network norms of value creation.
Huh? StackExchange has karma! So does LW. The value exchange mechanism is exposed for all to see. Reputation systems are designed markets. They also complement goods markets (Amazon, eBay, Yelp). And there’s intermediate cases like social media, where companies promote their content by making it upvote-worthy. Thinking that you do stuff to follow norms misses the point: you follow norms to make a profit.
Popper made the point that one of the problems with Marxism is that the Marxist has no problem to see any conflict as being about class struggle. In the same way you can see every problem as being about market and fit them into that perspective.
On StackExchange you find bad question and answer getting downvotes even when that costs the people who downvote karma. You wouldn’t expect that behavior to happen as often it it would be a market where participants purely optimize for getting their questions answered, earning karma and badges.
People desire to do work on StackExchange that doesn’t bring them karma. People work through review queues even when that doesn’t bring them karma to help the project.
If you start to look at a problem with multiple lenses you see more aspects of it and that helps generating new solutions.