Comment by njarboe
7 hours ago
German General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord (a high-ranking army officer in the Reichswehr/Wehrmacht era):
“I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined.
Some are clever and diligent — their place is the General Staff.
The next lot are stupid and lazy — they make up 90% of every army and are suited to routine duties.
Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership posts, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions.
One must beware of anyone who is both stupid and diligent — he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.”
Where my fellow ninety-percenters at?
I think we put too much negative emphasis on people who aren’t as gifted intellectually.
In reality, the world works because of human automotons, honest people doing honest work; living their life in hopefully a comforting, complete and wholesome way, quietly contributing their piece to society.
There is no shame in this, yet we act as though there is.
This is what pains me with how many people respond negatively toward the idea of everyone being able to earn an honest living and raise a family. Too often the idea of "deserving it" comes into it as if doing your small part to contribute to society is not enough.
I love a dog and a cat and tree. I can respect someone not as intelligent as other folks. I'd love it we started holding the crude, mean and willfully ignorant to a higher standard.
I'm not blaming you here, but I think "automatons" may be inaccurate. A lot of the jobs that seem menial would be utterly bollixed if done by an automaton. The people continually handle the edge cases and tiny discrepancies between formal procedures and how things actually work. Consider the many stories of people experience AI bots when they try to get vendor support for products. "Please let me talk to a real person."
Many of those people, probably including most bureaucrats, are working on systems that have already been automated to the fullest extent possible. This is one of the reasons why bureaucracies seem chaotic and inefficient -- the stuff that works is happening automatically and is invisible. You only see the exceptions.
The automation can be improved, but it's a laborious process and fraught with the risks associated with the software crisis. You never know when a project is going to fall into the abyss and never emerge, and the best models of project failure are stochastic.
1 reply →
The movie Perfect Days captures this perfectly.
Human automatons? Why would you have mercy for automatons? Just call them cattle, we might feel more compassion towards them if we don't think of them as machinelike.
1 reply →
I’m here man. Just want to make money and support my family. Couldn’t care less what some German general thinks about me. Even less care about online clowns trying to put people in buckets.
> Just want to make money and support my family.
That'd be just fine. But you do seem to care and feel hurt enough to call people online clowns.
I think this heuristic used to be more useful before it became widely known. Laziness is a fine quality if diligence is publicly rewarded, but once people game the metrics to look more lazy than they really are, things break
I much prefer the Napolean attributed joke version where diligent is replaced with energetic. It ends with Napolean being asked "but general what about the fourth group, stupid and energetic?"
"I have them shot".