> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
>
>     /In the year 2081, the 211th, 212th, and 213th amendments to the
>     Constitution dictate that all Americans are fully equal and not
>     allowed to be smarter, better-looking, or more physically able
>     than anyone else. The Handicapper General's agents enforce the
>     equality laws, forcing citizens to wear "handicaps": masks for
>     those who are too beautiful, loud radios that disrupt thoughts
>     inside the ears of intelligent people, and heavy weights for the
>     strong or athletic./
>
>
> I *personally* think there is room for seemingly contradictory ideas.
>
> The acknowledgement that many advantages (of birth, circumstance, etc)
> are amplified by our culture... those with the most aptitude for a
> given activity are usually those given the most support (material,
> emotional, financial) to continue to exploit/capitalize/pursue the
> honing and application of said aptitudes.   To those whose parents
> were literate, or were native speakers of the lingua franca of the
> lands they live in, or who were aware of and supported the activities
> and propensities their child(ren) were adept at, and/or were highly
> valued by the community, it is *natural* that they would be much more
> likely to excel (and be rewarded for said excellence) by the community
> which is in some sense selecting for the "good of the group".
>
> Whether we call it democratization or egalitarianism (I prefer the
> latter, as the former implies the "will of the majority", while the
> latter implies equal opportunity and support to every individual in a
> group),  paying attention to these strong positive feedback loops and
> adjusting them to feed some of the less *obvious* candidates for
> excellence would seem not only like a good strategy in support of pure
> egalitarianism (of which Vonnegut presents the
> background/complement/dark-side) but also potentially a more optimum
> strategy for the "good of the group". 
>
> If we consider *both* strategies to be something like a search over a
> landscape, the latter has benefits for very rugged landscapes while
> the former would seem to operate best on smooth landscapes.   I
> propose that "ocracies" have generally been put in place (at least
> partially) TO smooth the landscapes and thereby allow for more simple
> (and effective?) search/optimization strategies.  
>
> The argument of *diversity* is most often used to promote the latter
> strategy, which in my estimation is another way of acknowledging the
> rough landscape as a simple fact, attempting to respond efficiently
> and effectively to it, rather than trying to
> ignore/wish/legislate/regulate the complexity away.
>
> - Steve Bergeron
>
> On 6/6/18 10:52 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> Glen writes:
>>  
>> "This reminded me of my (postmodern) criticism of open source (in spite of 
>> any of my advocacy of it), that open source *can* be exploited by an elite 
>> set of people who are elite by their capability to know how to read, use, 
>> and think about code, or design google queries, or SEO. It's only 
>> "democratization" IF the skills and resources to use it are available to 
>> everyone."
>>
>> How about bicycle racing.   Not everyone can achieve > 80 ml/kg/min VO2 max, 
>> but a few people can.    These are biologically gifted people, and then they 
>> train like hell too, and/or sometimes use performance enhancing drugs.   
>> There are some people that can train like hell but always be beaten by 
>> someone than trains as hard or less.  They just don't have it.   
>>
>> Open source as a meritocracy is attractive to its adherents because it 
>> selects for individuals that succeed in developing a particular kind of 
>> sustained intellectual productivity, based on nothing else but the fact that 
>> they do.    You can't just go through a particular training procedure and 
>> come out a productive peer in this community.  It doesn't matter if you are 
>> born a citizen of a hypothetical Code Nation.    People from all over the 
>> world end-up being recruited to major tech firms who can see the value of 
>> their work, and not just the bullet points on a resume.
>>
>> It seems silly to say that one would democratize elite bicycle racing.   
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>> ============================================================
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to