Oh, goodness, looks like there are some real reasons to be dubious about the ICL corona virus simulation,
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-real-scandal-is-why-did-anyone-ever-listen-to-this-guy/ -- rec -- On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 4:45 PM Steven A Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > The folks at SFI did a paper a couple of years ago about how snippets of > constitutions have propagated into other constitutions around the world… > > … Bob > > And one wonders what is "beyond psyops" where "deep staters" (illuminati?) > so deep they transcend states go about like retroviruses, inserting > sequences into the genome (law/policy?) apparatus of nations? Wait, I > think this very likely multinational corporations and industry-lobbies > (fossil fuels, guns/arms, ??? ) and the wealthy families/individuals > behind/entwined-with them are doing! > > "I love/hate it when a metaphor comes together!" (visualize George Peppard > muttering this around a fat stogie) > > On May 7, 2020, at 2:23 PM, Steven A Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Nick - > > I doubt I can do justice to this for you, but will give a try. > > The idea(l) behind open-source is two-fold: > > 1. develop a "commons" of re-useable resources to be shared by all. > This concept really took off with the introduction of Linus Thorvald's > Adaptation of BSD Unix to run on IBM PCs and an explosion of software built > on top of and around that one thing. This movement began a lot earlier > and the world of Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) variant of ATT Unix > was perhaps the strongest center for that... other efforts I was aware of > include things like the Andrew File System (AFS) out of CMU (nod to Frank) > and project Athena out of MIT. > 2. crowdsource the troubleshooting, debugging, and validation of > system's design. By making the source code available and free to use > (with some restrictions), large numbers of system/software designers become > motivated to look at, adopt, improve, build-upon that code-base and thereby > improve and vet the code well. There are notable exceptions indicating > that big holes/bugs can exist in spite of this scrutiny. I think there was > a hoopla a few years ago around some (obvious?) security holes in the > primary open-source router software used in most pro-sumer grade network > routers, and maybe even commercial-class ones. > > This GitHub thing Roger posted is (as Roger indicated in his subject/post) > is clearly trolling on behalf of the anti-lockdown movement... trying to > use the open-source community mechanism (open and free view of the software > and the process of it's development, and the ability for anyone to pitch > in, comment, criticize) against the ideas behind this particular model (and > ANY? similar model). > > I'm not sure this is a first, but from what I know, there haven't been > "political" trolls haranguing GitHub mediated open-source efforts... there > have probably been "religious" wars between differing schools of thought on > the best way to solve a particular problem, but the preferred way to handle > that is to FORK the project and let the alternative subset go pursue their > alternative ideas. > > To some extent, this is the way the world is responding to the pandemic at > a policy level. Each country roughly has it's own unique/idiosyncratic > response to the pandemic... some perhaps taking their lead from others. > Within the USA (and I presume other "federated" governments) we have > states/governors following the general guidelines (lame as they may be) of > the federal government and modifying/elaborating them to match their > regional context, and again each county/city/borough/neighborhood may well > do the same. In principle these policies are open and transparent as are > the data that are gathered at each level on the resources expended and the > results obtained. This is the Open-Data aspect that Tom Johnson and > others here promote. > > The US Constitution (and our entire body of law) might be considered > open-source and I suspect more than a few states and younger countries have > borrowed parts of our constitution and legal system to build their own from > (for better and worse)... just as our Foundling Fatheds apparently used > some of the features exhibited by the (orally maintained) Iroquois > Federation and the ideas of French political thinkers such as Montesquieu. > > > </ramble> > > - Steve > > Marcus, > > Thanks for taking my question seriously. I understood what I was talking > about even less than I usually do. > > Let’s say I was an evil genius and wanted to introduce evil code into a > project on github. What would happen? > > N > > Nicholas Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > Clark University > [email protected] > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> <[email protected]> *On > Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels > *Sent:* Thursday, May 7, 2020 11:05 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]> <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Meanwhile, back on the troll farms > > Nick writes: > > *< *What exactly IS the policing mechanism in open source. Darwinian? > Reputational? Does this HAVE to provoke a crisis of confidence in the > general public? Or could it be seen as a heroic thrown-together first step > that is now being improved? > > > They are whining about simple or absent unit tests as a litmus test for > whether the code is reliable. It’s like saying you don’t dare drive your > car if you didn’t take out its alternator and test its voltage output last > week. ‘cause someone might have changed the alternator! Eventually > there will be consequences if the alternator fails, like stalling or the > battery dying. Same thing in a big simulation. All of the parts and > pieces of a simulation are there for a reason and global things will start > to change in noticeable ways if something is broken. I would say getting > mechanisms working correctly is less difficult that choosing what > mechanisms are appropriate in the first place. Usually in use of a > simulation one has instrumentation available on almost everything, and > there is a constant checking and double- checking even if those checks are > not embodied in automated tests. Automated tests can even give a false > sense of security, because they may not deal with the parameter ranges that > happen in with the coupled system. If you would rather have a bunch of > unit tests, or to have modelers using and stressing the code every day, you > have the wrong priorities. > > My irritation is with the notion of unit tests as a prerequisite for code > reliability. There are tighter ways to integrate assertions of code > behavior with the code. The bandwagon obsession with unit tests is in > some sense an obstacle even better practices. I wouldn’t even call them > trolls, because a troll has intention to rile people up. These folks are > more like pompous ditto heads who feel the need to posture about the right > way to do software engineering. People that love unit tests love not > understanding the problem they are solving, and prefer to work in pieces. > This take a is a little harsh, but in this context (advising COVID-19 > policy) I don’t find the behavior very helpful. > > Marcus > > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
