Readit News logoReadit News
studentrob commented on Chesterton's Fence: A lesson in second order thinking (2021)   fs.blog/chestertons-fence... · Posted by u/ensocode
bee_rider · 2 years ago
If the standard is that we maintain fences that don’t have an articulated justification, we will end up with fences that are necessary, but which don’t have an articulated justification. They may be justifiable, but without that justification articulated, we have don’t really have an easy way of telling which are justifiable.

Chesterton finds himself surrounded by fences which have no articulated justification, but which might be necessary/justifiable. This is a predicament of his own making. If he and everyone else in the town always bulldozed any fence they came across which doesn’t have a justification, people who want fences would start writing down why they’d put them there.

This would be helpful, because not only will it tell us which fences shouldn’t be torn down. It would tell us which fences we should actively maintain.

studentrob · 2 years ago
I don't think you understand Chesterton's point. It's not that hard to see it is valuable to know why things were built.

It's the same reason we study history, to know what came before us so that we can make good decisions going forward.

studentrob commented on Chesterton's Fence: A lesson in second order thinking (2021)   fs.blog/chestertons-fence... · Posted by u/ensocode
kstenerud · 2 years ago
Of course it does. But this is nothing new. Rich young people have been doing it for centuries.

They make their short term gains that they congratulate their cleverness for, then suffer the consequences, and those that survive are the ones that re-learn the lessons of old.

But on the other hand, it's sometimes the only way to get the old method out of the way so that new efficiencies can be gained with the technologies available today. Of course most will fail, but some will survive.

Shoot first, ask questions later.

studentrob · 2 years ago
Not arguing that it's a new thing, but there is always another way.

Making the problem bigger is an interesting way to go about it. I will grant that doing so does expand the number of people impacted, and therefore the number of people interested in solving the problem is also bigger, as well, perhaps, as the apparent pay off for solving it. But ultimately, the solution is going to be something that could have been applied by the same people who expanded the size of the problem.

studentrob commented on Chesterton's Fence: A lesson in second order thinking (2021)   fs.blog/chestertons-fence... · Posted by u/ensocode
bee_rider · 2 years ago
Fences don’t maintain themselves, and I don’t think we should give either side a pass. The town should have a general tradition of tearing down unjustified fences and keeping documentation for the justification of fences. It shouldn’t be assumed there was a good reason, the party installing the fence should have presented an argument for the fence in the first place.

Chesterton’s argument is that we should assume there was a reason in the absence of an argument for the fence. This is only the case if there’s a proliferation of necessary, unjustified fences. We should not let that sort of situation emerge in the first place.

studentrob · 2 years ago
You don't seem to grasp the thrust of the article. Chesterton does not set up two sides. And I don't know what you mean by "necessary, unjustified fences." Those two words stand in juxtaposition. If a fence is necessary, it can be justified. If it's not necessary, it cannot be justified.
studentrob commented on Chesterton's Fence: A lesson in second order thinking (2021)   fs.blog/chestertons-fence... · Posted by u/ensocode
bee_rider · 2 years ago
Chesterton will have to contend with our time honored tradition of tearing down fences. It might be the case that any particular fence is important, but being a culture that tends to tear-down fences has the second-order effect of being more adaptable.

> Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp-post, which many influential persons desire to pull down. A grey-clad monk, who is the spirit of the Middle Ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say, in the arid manner of the Schoolmen, “Let us first of all consider, my brethren, the value of Light. If Light be in itself good—” At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down. […the lamppost is taken down but it turns out the lamppost was good…]

Poorly placed lampposts waste electricity and attract bugs (making the area worse off, and messing with their biology). They also have a maintenance cost. We should make a habit of tearing down lampposts. We should at least not maintain lampposts if there’s no articulated reason to have them there.

The robed figure and the town share in the blame. The robed figure should, if he wants us to keep up the lamppost, be able to present a punctual argument to keep it. On the other hand, the town shouldn’t rely on some old robed figure to go around cryptically warning of the importance of lampposts, the town should have an office of public works that documents why the lamppost was made. Angry mobs are just a dumb way of making civic infrastructure decisions. By having a well-exercised, well-documented process for tearing down lampposts, the town will completely circumvent the problem!

> Take the case of supposedly hierarchy-free companies. Someone came along and figured that having management and an overall hierarchy is an imperfect system.

[…]

> Without a formal hierarchy, people often form an invisible one, which is far more complex to navigate and can lead to the most charismatic or domineering individual taking control, rather than the most qualified.

[…]

> It is certainly admirable that hierarchy-free companies are taking the enormous risk inherent in breaking the mold and trying something new. However, their approach ignores Chesterton’s Fence and doesn’t address why hierarchies exist within companies in the first place.

But there are tons of companies, we don’t have the choice of removing the fence or not. It is more like, we have a blueprint of a farm, and it includes a fence, which some suspect might be unnecessary, maybe even harmful. So let’s try a batch of farms without that fence. Then, document whether or not it worked out in the form of case-studies. Bam, the fence is no longer mysterious.

These second order effects are often too hard to guess at from first principles. Let people try tearing them down, and see what happens. We don’t need fence protection services, we need a strong middle class and safety net so that people can try building that fenceless company, fail, and land on their feet.

We see this in governance too, the US was set up to run 50 permutations of an experiment. Just have each state try their thing, and then observe that Massachusetts’s plan worked out best and copy them.

studentrob · 2 years ago
> Chesterton will have to contend with our time honored tradition of tearing down fences.

The point is not to prevent teardown of fences. It's to know why they were setup in the first place. If it was put there for no reason other than to spend what's in the budget, then there is no barrier to removing it. But if it was there for good reason then you need to prepare a counter argument for why it should be removed.

studentrob commented on Chesterton's Fence: A lesson in second order thinking (2021)   fs.blog/chestertons-fence... · Posted by u/ensocode
studentrob · 2 years ago
Unpopular opinion: This conflicts with SV's "disrupt everything" mantra.
studentrob commented on No Source Code == No Patent   albertcory50.substack.com... · Posted by u/AlbertCory
marginalia_nu · 3 years ago
> Software copyright is good enough.

To play the devil's advocate: Is it though?

Especially recently we've seen the widespread acceptance of copyright and license laundering through large machine learning systems such as copilot and chatgpt, backed by enough microsoft laywers to prevent meaningful push back from the copyright owners. They'll output verbatim copies of what was previously copyrighted code.

If it is true that software copyright can be cleaned away in such a fashion, maybe patenting the algorithm itself actually is necessary to avoid big tech companies like microsoft from forcibly strip mining the ideas of independent creators.

studentrob · 3 years ago
> To play the devil's advocate: Is it though?

Yes. Copyright already protects what a patent granted for source code would protect.

The problem you describe exists in both scenarios, and is resolved with enforcement. You can sneakily break the law, and you run the risk of getting caught for fraud.

studentrob commented on Binance sees $2B in outflows as troubles compound   wsj.com/articles/binance-... · Posted by u/danso
studentrob · 3 years ago
> FYI this is the same guy who praised FTX.

I'm unfamiliar. Is there a source to this claim?

studentrob commented on SVB chief pressed Congress to weaken risk regulations   theguardian.com/business/... · Posted by u/nemoniac
studentrob · 3 years ago
Wonder what Sacks will say. He was saying there should be more regulation on All In

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/all-in-with-chamath-ja...

studentrob commented on The decline of net neutrality activism   neelc.org/posts/net-neutr... · Posted by u/neelc
wankle · 3 years ago
> I believe broadband ISPs were implementing data caps, and they backed off on that after Biden was elected.

You're welcome to believe as you wish. We've never seen data cap issues, under President Trump or Biden, or any president.

studentrob · 3 years ago
> Comcast extends delay on debuting data caps in the Northeast

> Following a multi-month suspension of its usage-based policy during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, Comcast restored and updated its data usage policies in July 2020, raising the monthly limit to 1.2 terabytes – 200 gigabytes more than the 1TB limit that was in place prior to the COVID-19 outbreak. Under the revised data plan, residential broadband customers who exceed 1.2TB of data per month are charged $10 for each additional bucket of 50GB, up to a maximum of $100 per month (Comcast's maximum data overage charge prior to the pandemic was $200). Comcast also sells a standalone unlimited data option that costs an additional $30 per month.

https://www.lightreading.com/cablevideo/comcast-extends-dela...

studentrob commented on The decline of net neutrality activism   neelc.org/posts/net-neutr... · Posted by u/neelc
studentrob · 3 years ago
The whole point is to not charge users twice for both the volume AND the rate of flow.

It's not hot button because there is no FCC chair. If the dems seat a chair, regardless of who it is, that would allow grassroots campaigns to reactivate.

Under Trump, I believe broadband ISPs were implementing data caps, and they backed off on that after Biden was elected. And some telecoms offer zero rated content. It's far more common overseas for telecoms and content providers to partner in providing access, so you get places like the Philippines where Facebook basically is the internet.

u/studentrob

KarmaCake day2602February 19, 2010
About
Student at heart, computer scientist at work

hnchat.com:bpLXHOtDzM5sxTzmV2J1

View Original