11 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2020
    1. two polar opposite parties constantly embattled in their own agendas and ideologies.

      There's more than two parties.

    2. Centrists tend to dislike special interest influence and unfair practices.

      Centrists must hate voting because the current political climate is the manifestation of special interests.

    3. Centrists are independent.

      You're not independent if you're constantly keeping track of what ideologies are present and constantly trying to shift you're perspective so you're not "limited' by ideology.

    4. Centrist conviction is not limited by ideology

      Ideology changes. Ideology isn't even limited by ideology.

    5. Ideology limits the capacity of reasoning

      Ideology is the manifestation of reasoning. Typically it starts by defining a world view and then building upon it. Here's a professor lecturing on how Marxism / Socialism built upon itself: https://youtu.be/a1WUKahMm1s?t=1441

    6. ut rather allows for it as reasonable

      This isn't unique to centrism! This is how politics has operated for 1000s of years.

    7. doing what is right.

      What is "right" can be defined by the same systems that you would consider "biased". EX: Universal Healthcare

    8. risk and capacity in context of these needs

      You need to have a perspective on what risk and capacity are. You can't just claim you're supporting them.

    9. reason and pragmatism considerate of short and long term thinking

      This is not unique to centrism.

    10. solutions are more important than bias

      Bias is always present. You can't get rid of it you can only account for it. But having bias doesn't mean you have a bad solution.

  2. Sep 2018
    1. Despite the most celebrated tech companies' aversion to explicit hierarchy, their widespread use of stock options as compensation, and other corporate techniques to convince workers that every member of "the team" is on the same side, it's clear that the people at the top are know that wages come at the expense of profits. Thus, Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe, Intuit and Pixar have not yet disentangled themselves from antitrust and class action lawsuits resulting from an agreement--initiated by Google and Apple, and eventually involving dozens more companies, with more than a million employees in total--to cap wages by refusing to compete for each others' employees. This cartel resulted in several billion dollars in lost wages, which went straight to corporate profits. But this transfer, which the law might recognize as theft, is in fact only the tip of the iceberg. It represents a deviation from the ideal of a competitive market, which itself offers no guarantee to workers that they'll receive value equivalent to what they provide. Across the whole U.S. economy, hourly productivity grew by 80 percent in the last 40 years, while hourly income for the median worker grew only 10 percent. In the software industry, measured productivity has grown 12 percent a year for the last 25 years--meaning that it doubles about every six years. Wages have increased in tech, but not that fast. Software developers often buy into the idea of advancement by individual merit--either through a liberal lens in which meritocracy is an ideal we still need to work toward, or a libertarian one in which everyone is already where they deserve to be, top or bottom. This is partly a trickle-down illusion, based on an aspiration to have more in common with Larry Page, Sergey Brin and Mark Zuckerberg than a bank teller or barista. But it also has a basis in the following reality: Most programmers personally know a lot more colleagues who became unhappy at some workplace and quit for a better job than who achieved something through any kind of collective organizing. In this context, it's easy for those who believe they are being mistreated to feel isolated and even personally inadequate, rather than seeking solidarity from co-workers. The cultural barriers aren't insurmountable. It's hard to explain this year's union drive at Gawker as the product of some sclerotic old-economy work structure, for example. And collective organizing could very obviously bring benefits that are hard to negotiate individually: transparency around salary and promotions, with equal pay for equal work; reasonable scheduling and accommodations like child care for people with families; the right to contribute to open source projects or veto the release of insecure, privacy-violating or otherwise unprofessional code.