Large organizations like the EPA or national labs have many people competing for status and will take advantage of an opportunity to displace a colleague that breaks with policy or advises an action that is contrary to the best research. It certainly isn't immune from corruption, but the corruption takes more work maintain.
-----Original Message----- From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 7:12 AM To: friam@redfish.com Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on government Right. The question is whether it's all bribes all the way down. Dave didn't mention if/whether there was a team of Referees or if he was the only one. In today's buzzy tech scene, we're stupid to simply consider the tech alone. We also have to try to internalize externalities, perhaps even the unforeseen ones. E.g. deploying your benign chatbot and watching 4chan users turn it into a misogynist nazi ... or taking a contract to develop more plutonium pits despite evidence your local environment is permanently polluted with it already. If we expand the concept of the "bribe" out from money to influence or ego-caressing, it's relatively easy to find people we've met over our lifetimes who have obviously taken something akin to bribes. When Dave suggests "next to zero" accountability, that's what comes to my mind. It's no wonder silly concepts like karma persist. Who doesn't dream of a world where occult accountability mechanisms exist for influence-obsessed Karens and Kevins everywhere, including academic circles and neighborhood meetings. It's bribes of one form or another all the way down. On 8/27/24 20:02, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Well-resourced individuals and organizations can enjoy a system like this > where intervention is straightforward via bribes. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 4:48 PM > To: friam@redfish.com > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] on government > > Marcus is correct, but also wrong. > > Judges should not make scientific decisions. Challengers to rules, often > large corporations with an intense desire to pollute or commit other social > harm, should not either. Nor, should agency "scientists" whose decisions are > seldom more than "because I said so." > > Fortunately none of the above needs to be operative. The most lucrative job I > ever held was "Referee" in a court case in Minnesota. (Referees in other > jurisdictions are often called special masters.) The case involved software: > a company wanting to move to a new vendor and the former vendor demanding a > huge ransom ($1,000,000 in 1998) to decrypt the clients database so the new > vendor could use it. My job as referee was to decide the 'science'; e.g., > what was and was not possible by programming and what market rate would be > for creating such a program. The judge decided the law. > > To be a referee, it was imperative that I have no ties to either side in the > dispute (e.g., no past or future consulting). I was paid the same rate as the > lead attorneys on the two sides—$300/hour. Both sides insisted on hearings > and depositions and submitting voluminous evidence. So, what could have been > decided in less than an hour (time to read a description of the two sides and > see the obvious) ended up in 145 billable hours. > > The referee/special master model has been around for a long long time and > should be used. And, you should see both the law and decisions be somewhat > fluid over time to reflect the evolving nature of science. Something that > would never happen with Chevron intact. > > davew > > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024, at 11:46 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >> Dave writes: >> >> < Before Chevron was overturned, those same agencies determination of >> "science" behind those rules could not be challenged. > >> >> Good -- the justices aren't scientists. The mechanism of change should be >> through scientific debate, not legal debate. >> -- ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
