Amazon Rekognition for government surveillance
9 hours ago
We're still in the Enlightenment, only now reason has shown us that we are not reasonable - and a more empirical study of man helps us remember the point of the whole program
My argument is that this principle applies to the more marginal areas, but the necessity for labor coordination, including irrigation, is really what was important. Any place that could get 1) a big bump in food production from central coordination, and 2) which you couldn't defect from and survive, would favor state formation.Rice is an even more tyrannical and enslaving crop than wheat.The key difference between rice and wheat is that the former can produce ~7.3 million kcals per hectare, whereas wheat can only reach 1.5 million. Unlike wheat, there was no need for fallow land, and bythe 13thC in China a system of double (or sometiems triple) crop was established. "And thus the great demographic expansion of southern China began."
The high population density created by rice, combined with the necessity for elaborate top-down irritation systems, resulted in strong state authority that constantly pursued large-scale works.
[The pre-work you have to do in order to make a contribution] is a lot further today than it ever was. The amount of knowledge you have to have as a scientist to be able to get to the frontier, to make these contributions, is just so much larger today. And you can see this from the amount of time of it takes to do a PhD, how old an inventor is the time they first take out a patent, the size of research teams. Ben Jones, he's a fantastic economics professor at Kellogg, has papers that document these things.I had previously argued for exactly this idea as an explanation for technological stagnation (or, prior to that, increasing research inefficiency), with admitted nerve calling this ultimate economic heath death Caton-Schumpeter stasis.
That means that for individuals, they could either end up spending more time studying, which is what you see in the PhD length, or you see that they just focus on narrower and narrower fields. For a given amount of time, you only learn something about a much, much narrower field. Which might mean that you just have less good insights if it turns out that for all you progress, the fields...The wider field you have to be combining with some knowledge from quite distributed science.
|HARDCORE FAN||CASUAL FAN|
|motivated by moral foundations||by utility calculations|
|end in themselves||deliberate, external goal-oriented|
|higher value on loyalty||lower value on loyalty|
|adopted in childhood, maybe from family||adopted voluntarily in adulthood|
|central to identity||not central to identity|
|unwilling or unable to verbalize||position clearly verbalized|
|more often encountered in person||more often encountered online|
|sees casual fans as untrustworthy, sleazy||sees hardcore fans as stupid, gullible|