On this: www.discogs.com/master/30439...

This is grounded in the intrinsic validity thesis, but also in the idea that any alternative explanation would be extremely cumbersome.
How could humans agree about a language without language?
2/

Again, don't quote her through my summary, but someone asked whether this mobility across religious boundaries is due to the landscape itself. "Does this moral force belong to the river?" I would have guessed that the answer would have been no, but AP is braver than me.
3/

oh i'm sure; that one in particular is a classic though. i just advanced it as a sort of metacommentary on how this kind of information doesn't seem to make it to people in charge of things

there is a paper from 1987 that predicts this: ics.uci.edu/~corps/phase...

This is a great place to invoke James Scott's Seeing Like A State - management only cares about what they can measure, so they create more indicators that employees treat as useless. Garbage in, garbage out, wasting employees' time and making them feel oversurveiled

"If your expenses + reimbursements are difficult to file, that's OK, bc the ppl above you don't care if you get reimbursed. If it takes applicants 128% longer to apply, the ppl who implemented Workday don't really care.... Customer service is Workday's goal. It's just that the customer isn't you."

"Workday reveals what's important to the ppl who run Fortune 500 companies: easily and conveniently distributing busy work across large workforces. This is done with the arbitrary and perfunctory performance of work tasks [+] with the throttling of momentum by making finance and HR tasks difficult"

"Workday touts its ability to track emplee performance by collecting data + marking results, but it's employees who spend ⏰ inputting this data.... At each interval higher-ups pressed HR for more data, bc they wanted what they'd paid for with Workday: more work product" = 1000s more hrs of busy work

I still think about this piece from last spring, which explains why the dysfunction and inefficiency are *intentional*. Plus, it’s not merely coincidental that executives for these software companies often sit on university boards.