|
|
|
|
|
|
by exmadscientist
323 days ago
|
|
|
What a strange article. It feels like one of those cases where the author gathers so many of the pieces, then, just... fails to solve the puzzle. Or get anywhere close. I agree that everything feels broken. I'd like to do something about it. Let me deploy my leverage to work on that. Here's my "labor leverage", right here, this comment. Check. Leverage strength... not much. Let's bring my "capital leverage" to bear... okay, done, my 401(k) is invested in my favorite companies. Did you notice? No? Okay, leverage strength... let's go with epsilon^2. And my "code leverage"... uh... I don't think I have any. So, wait, I, personally, don't have any third-order leverage at all? How am I supposed to go up against trillion-dollar, billion-node networks, with my epsilon^3 "leverage"? That's the real problem: I don't actually have any meaningful leverage. I'm not in the game. Is that actually true? Doesn't matter: I believe it to be true. Sure looks like everything is broken to me. |
|
|
This is about hyper-scaling unicorns who can create and scale a business faster than the regulatory framework[government] can respond. "Disruption" is a dog whistle for "we're going to break the law faster than the government can keep up." The game is scaling from disruption to entrenchment before the first "The United States vs You" hits your desk.
If you don't have the ability to play the game then you can believe it doesn't exist, but those playing it found a slot machine that only lands on 777.