TensionThe ability to see like a data structure afforded us the technology we have today. But it was built for and within a set of societal systems—and stories—that can’t cope with nebulosity. Worse still is the transitional era we’ve entered, in which overwhelming complexity leads more and more people to believe in nothing. That way lies madness. Seeing is a choice, and we need to reclaim that choice. However, we need to see things and do things differently, and build sociotechnical systems that embody this difference.This is best seen through a small example. In our jobs, many of us deal with interpersonal dynamics that sometimes overwhelm the rules. The rules are still there—those that the company operates by and laws that it follows—meaning there are limits to how those interpersonal dynamics can play out. But those rules are rigid and bureaucratic, and most of the time they are irrelevant to what you’re dealing with. People learn to work with and around the rules rather than follow them to the letter. Some of these might be deliberate hacks, ones that are known, and passed down, by an organization’s workers. A work-to-rule strike, or quiet quitting for that matter, is effective at slowing a company to a halt because work is never as routine as schedules, processes, leadership principles, or any other codified rules might allow management to believe.The tension we face is that on an everyday basis, we want things to be simple and certain. But that means ignoring the messiness of reality. And when we delegate that simplicity and certainty to systems—either to institutions or increasingly to software—they feel impersonal and oppressive. People used to say that they felt like large institutions were treating them like a number. For decades, we have literally been numbers in government and corporate data structures. BreakdownAs historian Jill Lepore wrote, we used to be in a world of mystery. Then we began to understand those mysteries and use science to turn them into facts. And then we quantified and operationalized those facts through numbers. We’re currently in a world of data—overwhelming, human-incomprehensible amounts of data—that we use to make predictions even though that data isn’t enough to fully grapple with the complexity of reality.How do we move past this era of breakdown? It’s not by eschewing technology. We need our complex socio-technical systems. We need mental models to make sense of the complexities of our world. But we also need to understand and accept their inherent imperfections. We need to make sure we’re avoiding static and biased patterns—of the sort that a state functionary or a rigid algorithm might produce—while leaving room for the messiness inherent in human interactions. Chapman calls this balance “fluidity,” where society (and really, the tech we use every day) gives us the disparate things we need to be happy while also enabling the complex global society we have today.

this government is charged with the external and mutual relations only of these states, that the states themselves have principal care of our persons, our property, and our reputation, constituting the great field of human concerns, we may well doubt whether our organisation is not too complicated, too expensive; whether offices and officers have not been multiplied unnecessarily, and some times injuriously23 to the service they were meant to promote. I will cause to be laid before you an essay towards a statement, of those who, under public employment of various kinds, draw money from the treasury, or from our citizens.

“Twitch’s leadership is uncomfortable with mid-level and lower level employees pushing for change,”

Mike: Yeah. But they didn't tell us that if he wasn't from there, that it didn't apply to us. And since he's not a resident, or he's not anything, they just took it all away. But they gave me a social security card. They gave me a work permit. They gave me everything that I needed. I even got my taxes one year [Emotional]. I got $3,000 back, put my taxes on my wall, like I'm really doing it.

I'm still calling this v1.00 as this is what will be included in the first print run.

So I propose having the repo in place, and using it for targeted proposals where we really want feedback from early users, and hold off formalising anything more until early next year, as you said.

It looks like you just deleted our lovely crafted issue template. It was there for good reasons. Please help us solving your issue by answering the questions asked in this template. I'm closing this. Please either update the issue with the template and reopen, or open a new issue.

@evilebottnawi Closing the issue because I removed the template looks like excessive bureaucracy.

If you're wearing the same shoes as I have so many times before where you're trying to make yourself heard and do what you ultimately believe is in the organisation's best interests

Actually, I probably would have ended up just paying for it myself due to the procurement challenges of even a single-digit dollar amount, but let's not get me started on that

Believing that there was no more work for philosophers as well, since Hegel (correctly understood) had already achieved absolute knowledge, Kojève left teaching after the war and spent the remainder of his life working as a bureaucrat in the European Economic Community, until his death in 1968.

pacts of the network society.  The Occupy movements showed networks of people standing up to capitalist institutions.  In the Movement for Black Lives, Black people are leading demands for structural change to the institutions that have oppressed and killed them for centuries.  However, the network society has also facilitated the public regrowth of hate groups such as the white supremacy movement.  

breaks down some of the traditional social hierarchies and national borders because information flows almost anywhere