We share that frustration, but anger/frustration at a post like this hurts that cause. It’s a moment for amplification that the CEOs need to be held to account and not for anger at a new tool that can help make it more likely that good people act - and good people do act - they just aren’t as loud. Ultimately we don’t focus on them because anger is what catches and hold our attention.
Too many times studies arrive (years) late, because they take time, and never make an impact outside of the academic world… Similarly, global warming studies are depressing in that they are exceptionally pedantic (and good) science that leads to nowhere, because in the end that’s not what the institutions care about. We’re missing grass-roots movements that would be springed-forward by social media. The outrage just needs chanelling into action. People are annoyed by studies.
Having the same team that did the study actually put forth a petition for regulation (while putting a bit less time into being pedantic and less focus on having 1300 corporations) would probably be a better use of everyone’s time. But I assume they don’t stand by their findings that strongly, and assume it’s not their fight (even though they are academically spear-heading it). Quick google found nothing.
In a perfect world, studies into peoples’ gut feelings (presumably also shared by anti-monopoly regulation institutions’ leaders) would be launched immediately, take months and be more focused (instead of looking at a 1300 corporations), have results and court callings for comment and explanation would be sent out. But we’re far from that. There is no [actually working] “criminal justice system” for the “free” market so far…
Studies such as the one in the thread are nice archival information though. Definitely maybe a step forward (if not forgotten quickly).
We share that frustration, but anger/frustration at a post like this hurts that cause. It’s a moment for amplification that the CEOs need to be held to account and not for anger at a new tool that can help make it more likely that good people act - and good people do act - they just aren’t as loud. Ultimately we don’t focus on them because anger is what catches and hold our attention.
I don’t know. I am conflicted.
Too many times studies arrive (years) late, because they take time, and never make an impact outside of the academic world… Similarly, global warming studies are depressing in that they are exceptionally pedantic (and good) science that leads to nowhere, because in the end that’s not what the institutions care about. We’re missing grass-roots movements that would be springed-forward by social media. The outrage just needs chanelling into action. People are annoyed by studies.
Having the same team that did the study actually put forth a petition for regulation (while putting a bit less time into being pedantic and less focus on having 1300 corporations) would probably be a better use of everyone’s time. But I assume they don’t stand by their findings that strongly, and assume it’s not their fight (even though they are academically spear-heading it). Quick google found nothing.
In a perfect world, studies into peoples’ gut feelings (presumably also shared by anti-monopoly regulation institutions’ leaders) would be launched immediately, take months and be more focused (instead of looking at a 1300 corporations), have results and court callings for comment and explanation would be sent out. But we’re far from that. There is no [actually working] “criminal justice system” for the “free” market so far…
Studies such as the one in the thread are nice archival information though. Definitely maybe a step forward (if not forgotten quickly).