New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a
nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a
"Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed
considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense
initiatives more successful? Can such an application of
science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable,
necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a new
Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published
every Thursday.
(10798 previous messages)
rshow55
- 04:22pm Mar 30, 2003 EST (#
10799 of 10801)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click
"rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for
on this thread.
When you're near a climax, a point where things are
shifting - things can get much better - or much worse. It
matters how careful people are. Almarst , I know you're
worried, and I am, too, but I'm more optimistic - and yes,
some math things help. Sometimes, screw-ups have some
aspects of instability.
Cylical pattern: ARROGANCE-IGNORANCE-FAILURE
This is an unstable cyclical pattern unless there
are lies or other things to lock down high levels of
arrogance and ignorance.
(Often, alas, there are. But it is getting harder to lie in
public about things that matter, though it is still much too
easy.)
If people learn - they can very often work things
out - and sometimes very well.
http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md01000s/md1131_1137.htm
In Chapter 4, p 63, Kline writes this:
" In very complex systems, such as
sociotechnical systems, we have no theory of entire systems,
and must therefore create, operate, and improve such systems
via feedback: that is, repeated cycles of human observations
plus trials of envisioned improvements in the real systems.
In such very complex systems, data from a wide variety of
cases therefore becomes the primary basis for understanding
and judgements . . . "
So for complex systems, and especially sociotechnical
systems, which are VERY complex, correct information matters,
again and again, because it is used as feedback to run or
modify the system. Unchecked assumptions can be expensive or
disastrous. Lies can be disastrous. Because if the reliability
of the information used in the feedback is limited, the
function of the system is also limited -- and the system is
likely to fail badly if it has to be changed.
There's a quote from Benjamin Franklin:
" Experience keeps a dear school. A fool
will learn in no other." 9386 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@28.4qGpaSyu6vx.2374844@.f28e622/10922
At some level, even the best of us are "fools" - we have to
learn by experience.
Maybe the world can find ways not to be too foolish.
We have to find ways to limit the ability of leaders - and
bureacracies - to decieve others or themselves. The limits
wouldn't have to be anything like perfect to be a great
improvement on the situation today.
When smart people like almarst raise concerns - that
can lead to improvement.
(2 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|