This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
You’re telling me that we can fix our corrupt, inefficient corporate incentives by…imitating Russia?
But only the good parts, I assume. The ones where you jail your businessmen if they don’t meet quotas set in 1991. Also, all of them need to be engineers, because having too much knowledge of finance turns you into a greedy trickster.
Yeah, the Soviets had a long history with this management style. Ours is better.
Consider that the Army did, in fact, decide its 155mm production was fine until the shooting started in Ukraine. Could they have been, and I know this is outlandish, right? If turning up production went as smoothly as you expected, would it actually have been “responsible” to demand 80s level production for 30 years of low-intensity conflicts?
Or maybe they knew it would be hard. Maybe they, as serious America-haters, decided to cripple an essential war industry. If only there were a strong, patriotic individual with the foresight to demand more 155mm. Need drones? Nope, the law says 155. Pivot to naval production? Nope, I’m not going to prison for that.
It’s a batshit insane model of procurement which would have avoided this problem at tremendous cost. I don’t think you understand procurement, project management, or engineering. As dumb as this Turkish contractor was, I expect you’d have done worse.
One of the tradeoffs in government project management is that if you loosen up procedure, you can move with greater speed and agility (and spend less money navigating bureaucracy) but you also increase the risk of embarrassing fuckups. Whereas if you stick to the normal procedure, everything takes forever (which adds costs), but you get fewer headlines about how some inept contractor failed to deliver in some comical fashion.
Of course, you can never foreclose the possibility of embarrassing fuckups (especially with how poorly aligned incentives are) and it's entirely possible to do both at once. In my little corner of the federal contracting world, we threw out the rulebook and are presently paying through the nose for a facilitating/coordinating contractor that has no idea what it is doing and hasn't even sped things up significantly.
As the kids say: many such cases.
Our customers are signaling the same thing. Visible lack of interest in existing R&D contracts. It’s always “what can you demo within a year?” or “how fast does this enter production?” If someone, even a sketchy startup, gave them a pitch for X units starting in 8 months, I suspect they’d throw money at it.
That hasn’t been very effective for something as complex as my product. Apparently, it’s not even that effective on shells, which are harder than the OP thinks, but at least have clearly defined requirements. I bet there are a couple dozen other contractors in various states of panic as they try to make good on promising the moon.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
How arrogant can you be to see a second-rate great power outproducing America in something as simple as shells? Not just outproducing America but making more shells than the entire Western bloc? All that corruption and they're still ahead?
And then decide 'no we aren't doing anything wrong, we have nothing to learn from Russia.' Guess what, there are always things to learn from other countries. Especially if they're outperforming you with fewer resources.
Wow, I didn't realize drones or 'naval production' were made in the same factory as 155mm... Obviously keeping shell factories that already there to enable production surges is just too radical of an idea, we needed to sell the tooling and shut them down to save a few pennies. So true!
They were dumb and wrong. This is obvious, we can see it in how they suddenly realized they needed shells. Serious ground wars need lots of shells. That's not a mysterious secret, we've known this since WW1. The cost of keeping production infrastructure for shells is tiny compared to the cost of not having shells when they're needed.
Seeing as the US loves hiring random, totally inexperienced AI fans to run these shell factories, maybe I will be the next contractor - if I brush up on my powerpoint slides, buzzwords and kickbacks. What a great system!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link