Coordination is physical
I already wrote about information being physical.
Now, I want to write about coordination.
Our civilisation is growing and becoming more interconnected. And coordination is at the core of it.
Paradoxically, most people do not feel the physicality of coordination. Coordination often feels less real than physical work. Some people go as far as qualifying coordination as "bullshit".
This is often idealised thinking, coming from the idea that the default state of the world should be perfectly coordinated. Unfortunately, all processes involving coordination are physical. Thus they have a cost, and thus they only ever happen if someone somewhere pays that cost.
Missing this is a pervasive blindspot. One of its most infamous manifestations is neglecting the cost of Governance.
For now, similar to Information Idealism, I'll call this blindspot "Coordination Idealism": the idea that coordination processes ought to have already happened, and at no cost.
Still in the same vein as the "Information is physical" page, I'll list a few of the physical processes involved in coordination.
Hopefully, this will help internalise the physical nature of coordination, such that readers have an easier time breaking down high-level tasks like "We need more alignment" or "We should coordinate better" into more actionable points.
Sharing Personal Preferences
A behaviour that is commonly found in agreeable people is to not share their personal preferences. They believe that not stating their preferences is a sign of politeness, and that stating them is a sign of selfishness. They think that if they do not state their preferences, it will be easier for the group to make decisions.
This is a mistake.
If someone does not share their preferences, then it becomes impossible to make a decision that takes them into account.
If no one shares their preferences, then it becomes de-facto impossible to make any good group decisions.
Making a decision that takes people's preferences into account requires processing people's preferences. This is physically impossible without said information. Unfortunately, people are usually the only ones who know their own preferences, so it means they must reveal them.
Because people realise this, what happens when someone does not explicitly state their preferences? Instead, we try to infer them, which is much less reliable and much more costly.
Possibly, in a not-too-far future, we will start reading people's minds thanks to advances in AI and neuroscience. This seems dystopian: I would rather have people just state their preferences and work together to integrate them.
Social Knowledge
I wrote here about Social Knowledge. I hope that after reading it and Information is Physical, it should be obvious that social knowledge is physical.
Thus, it can be manipulated like any other physical object, discussed plainly, and does not need to involve any magic or a fuzzy intuitions about human nature.
Common Knowledge
Similarly, I wrote here about Common Knowledge (missing). Common knowledge is necessary for many coordination processes, and by virtue of being physical, does not arise naturally whenever it is convenient.