https://www.overcomingbias.com/p/shrinking-economies-dont-innovate
There's something about this rhetoric that seems to rely on hierarchical separation, the separability of levels. I mean, obviously, if we draw a hard boundary around "innovation" such that it only contains things we human organisms care about or understand, then sure. Innovation halts/slows with birth rate. But isn't, say, the evolution of our gut biome also "innovative"? Or totally sans-human, isn't most of earth's history a story of innovation? What is it about the human-particular level of (primarily cultural) innovation that makes it so special? If I'm cynical, it's just navel gazing. But if I'm generous, there's something inherently computational (or universal, cognitive, translational, or Platonic) about the kind of innovation Hanson's talking about. I guess it's a longtermist or transhumanist way of thinking ... that Our innovations can possibly be stored and percolated more so than the modest, tightly bound to circumstances, innovations of our less computational sibling species. I don't buy it. But I'd like to be able to make the argument anyway. -- glen -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
