“Genuinely good new tools don’t tend to need coercion to fuel their adoption only a few years into their existence, right? What the fuck is going on here?”
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Glyph (glyph@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 04-Jul-2025 15:42:06 JST Glyph
-
Embed this notice
Blaise Pabón - controlpl4n3 (blaise@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 06-Jul-2025 04:52:25 JST Blaise Pabón - controlpl4n3
@glyph
I'm only half way through and already delighted to find someone who might actually be interested in the bugs I found in accounting.I can answer most of their questions but I don't know if anyone else is interested.
A general one around the utility of LLMsQ: people compare LLMs to calculators, or screwdrivers, or digital cameras, or whatever. I’m left wondering if the people saying this stuff have ever used any of those things.
A: No, they have not used any of those tools (or table saws).
The false analogy results from their observation that using $TOOL results in $WHATEVER.
It's the cargo cult pattern.
Since their process is optimized for producing $WHATEVER, everything else is someone else's problem.------ ok, so what? ------
I'm glad you asked. There is a scenario where all these musings become actionable.
In fact, it's the potential competitive advantage of #cooperatives over #corporate businesses.TL;DR: overtime, businesses controlled by external stakeholders become more expensive to operate.
OTOH, if an organization can make decisions based on operational requirements _instead of_ financial reporting requirements, they MAY avoid the accumulation of entropy and waste.
Otherwise, cargo culture takes over and we end up with Enron, Lehman Brothers and Theranos.
-
Embed this notice
Blaise Pabón - controlpl4n3 (blaise@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 06-Jul-2025 05:07:25 JST Blaise Pabón - controlpl4n3
Some of the questions about priorities and incentives are IMHO, covered in Nóva's book "Hacking Capitalism"
-
Embed this notice