Hot take: the Left sees money as more of a medium-of-exchange, which acknowledges the role of society and nature in the trade; the Right sees money as more of a store-of-value, which abstracts away society and appeals to the individualist fantasy 1/

https://twitter.com/paperbagriker/status/1696302283586416806

You can't eat money. You can't drink gold, paper notes, or numbers in databases. Money does not store potential energy like a lump of coal or a liter of petrol. (Not even Bitcoin, @saylor.)

Money is plainly not, in and of itself, a store-of-value. So why does it seem to be? 2/

Embarrassing stuff here from Richard Murphy. He contradicts himself about tax imposition by rewording it and calling it different.

"the ability to require the use of the currency was not imposed by imposing a tax... but by requiring tax payment after the spend had been made"

?? (alt text continued)

taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/04/2…

Progressives tend to like #MMT because it lays bare what is possible. Conservatives tend to hate it for the same reason. That said, I've known progressives, liberals, conservatives, right libertarians, Marxists, and anarchists who study #MMT.

It's descriptive, not ideological.

In a complex system like Twitter or AWS, there is always a trade-off between doing failure automation work up front and incurring operational burden later on. It's a decreasing ROI, and trying to automatically handle every possible failure case just isn't worth it. A thread. 1/14

https://twitter.com/danluu/status/1592272606992158720

Yes, of course you try to threat model all possible failure modes. But then you only handle the 95% or so known/expected cases and don't bother with the 5% unknown/rare cases. For those, you just throw smart humans at the problem once it arises. 2/14