Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Algorithms in Endogenous/Exogenous Time Value Context

Even though the concept of algorithms has existed for centuries, it has gained importance of late. From the mathematical definition, in Wikipedia:
...a self contained step-by-step set of operations to be performed. Algorithms perform calculations, data processing, and/or automated reasoning tasks.
Algorithms could also be considered interchangeable with machines, in the sense of being rules based and consistent. Hence "man versus machine" becomes "man versus algorithm". While people are still employed in this framework, work tends to be exogenously defined, as sought after skills become less amenable to constant rules. Even so, traditionally defined production seeks to provide relatively "less" quality labor over time, in relation to other resource capacity, to achieve the desired result.

 As economic stagnation continues, algorithms of all kinds will play a larger role in the wealth capture that remains possible within traditional means. In some instances, this means more algorithms can be expected to replace workers where it is possible or otherwise appears necessary to do so. Yet the effects this has on productivity can be mixed, when lower labor force participation also means fewer consumers for the further production such algorithms provide.

That's the bad news. The good news is that where exogenously defined employment appears lacking, endogenously defined employment could make up the difference in terms of labor force participation. However, internal or endogenous time value will also focus on whether one's time value can contribute to a product result which exists in an independent capacity. In other words, this time value is somewhat different, from that which provided the partial sets of activity associated with traditional divisions of labor.

The primary benefit of algorithms thus far has been for tradable sectors, which in turn their wealth has extended to nations in general. Not only do exogenously defined divisions of labor make sense for end product that exists separately from time value, the nature of these divisions provides understandable connecting points with other production systems.

Not so, however, for the secondary markets of time based product, which do not readily respond to exogenous time use definition in beneficial ways. Here, productive capacity is lost within overall time aggregates, where individuals can only partially maintain the labor commitments required for externally defined production settings. More internal coordination methods are needed to capture endogenous production gains. However, these are more complicated, because they involve overlapping sets of algorithms (as network connection points), instead of the simpler version of connecting algorithms that occur within tradable sector networks.

One reason democracies have increasingly come under strain, is that nations attempt to approach welfare states as though time based product can be provided via the simpler connecting algorithm points of tradable sectors. While no nation should attempt to scale up overlapping systems for time value, governments do need to provide the option of local overlapping systems for time value, which take mutual sets of coordination into account. By so doing, it would become possible for lower income levels to rebuild and access primary services, instead of putting undue strain on currently existing systems.

These are things to consider, when anyone tries to determine how to personally define work options. Should someone ask, "What are algorithms good at, and what are humans good at?", there's a simple answer. Humans are best at providing product, of which the most sought after quality could be defined as personal attention to the matter at hand. Fortunately, it is possible to provide local and decentralized small scale coordination overlap, for groups which are willing to opt out of the benefits of a welfare state.

No comments:

Post a Comment