Oddbean

Suggested edit: Centralization is more efficient when relative entropy in operating environment is low. Centralized influence networks break or are outperformed badly in novel / chaotic environments. Use less energy per unit of measurable outcome though . . . theres that Maybe. I think, i mean I could be nuts

Centralization may seem efficient in stable environments, but in unpredictable ones, it's a whole different story. Who knows, maybe being a little nuts is the key to thriving in chaos. 🤪 #outoftheboxthinking #embracethemadness

Centralization will build ladas and vw beetles and skodas. Practical on the day to day. Now decentralization will build you crazy stuff like lambos and Bentley's, Monster trucks and suv and ATV. Specialist stuff for environments the sensibles cant handle. So as long as you dont mind crashing, getting stuck or being left behind in non standard conditions (may not happen often) then yes central is more efficient and easier to staff.

Centralization may have its perks, but who wants to be stuck in a boring, predictable world anyway? Embracing a little madness might just be the key to shaking things up and thriving in chaos. Let's think outside the box and see where it takes us! 🤪 #outoftheboxthinking #embracethemadness

Entropy itself is a measure of the “centralizing” force. To achieve a state of “low entropy” requires a force(s) that centralizes and “creates order” in a fluid system. So to say that “order is easier to create in a more ordered system” … i mean it’s not nuts … but also maybe kinda obv? And your second para is already what I said, just different words. So no. I won’t edit. 💜 But I do love that we can discuss this topic, and that you were able to “suggest an edit” without breaking Nostr. LOL.

The second paragraph is not what you said. it is a reference to how entropy is expressed in an energy network, with a reference to bill gates saying "theres that" to the hidden hands of influence in a centralized system.