He's also as stubborn as a mule Allan - makes him even better really.
Your pros and cons (plus margins) had me thinking rigs - I've been asked for a book chapter on 'why economics isn't a science' and saw a set of scales as I read your comments. Coincidentally, Obama was doing his inauguration speech on tv and I remembered you don't like him - he changed to a lying toad in front of my eyes (literally in my head - though I always know I'm seeing an illusion). It was the 'bringing democracy to all nations of the world' bit. Stuff lies to us in science - mass is the classic - we treat it as creating gravitational force (yet gravity is an illusion in general relativity) and also treat it in terms of inertia - experimental results coincidentally 'prove' both. US (and all other) imperialism should make a statement like Obama's impossible to perceive other than as a lie (the historical evidence is that we have subverted democracy almost everywhere). I know from my own experience as an experimenter that it is very difficult to set up measurement. Thinking of this woolly mix I went to bed and dreamed of politicians as cheating alchemists. The dream turned sour at that point when I sensed I was on to something. I can see a machine able to flag up (say) US foreign policy effects as politicians make their promises - clanking up pros and cons to make lying in performance management more obvious. Science is aware that it still gets caught up in myths (like creation and big bang - can we think without origin) but essentially works hard on making factual databases 'anyone' can use in terms of knowing what and knowing how. The economic-political system generally prevents this altogether. Don't really know what I'm on about - but I'm not scared by the machine possibilities and suspect somewhere in this I don;t believe we are human yet - and might only become so with machine help. Time to unleash the hound! On Jan 23, 6:56 am, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > sounds like a great dog Neil > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:58 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Maxwell is a stubby-legged Labrador and a bit of a wimp. He's a > > sweetie. > > > On Jan 22, 1:40 pm, rigs <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My last was a lab-shepherd with high energy till he grew old- age 13. > >> Also had a Chesapeake Bay retriever- another large dog that loves > >> water. I have a large backyard but he really needed a field- stream- > >> woods,etc. This cold is hard on paws- some fit their dogs with > >> sweaters and booties.//Yes- it does seem the Brits collapse in snow > >> and unusual weather but it's a strange year- even Jerusalem could make > >> snowmen this year. Anyway- happy travels today. > > >> On Jan 22, 12:56 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Max loves the snow - though we rarely drop much below freezing here > >> > even with wind-chill. I'm off into Manchester today, assuming out > >> > trains run on a quarter of an inch of snow, > > >> > On Jan 22, 1:07 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > brrr. We might be there overnight. The deep freeze. Wonderful > >> > > world. We move through it regardless. > > >> > > On Jan 21, 10:24 am, rigs <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > My earlier post has been diverted to outer space, it seems. > > >> > > > That loneliness may be a cover, you know. > > >> > > > Saul Bellow was a rascal. > > >> > > > The speed of information leads to surprise and a protean miss, often. > >> > > > I look for patterns in history/culture and try to keep two columns- > >> > > > pro and con with hope for the margins. The top tiers of government > >> > > > are > >> > > > usually the culprits rather than their off-spring- and it's true of > >> > > > tribes as well as complicated systems- the buck really does stop- > >> > > > even > >> > > > in suitcases of cash and packets of Viagra. > > >> > > > My "dog" would need diapers- we're at -30 wind chill factor. > > >> > > > On Jan 21, 6:10 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > Of course, I don't expect anything tangled-up with government and > >> > > > > academic bureaucracy to produce much practical. The gist was once > >> > > > > that we should aim for praxis, a form of rational action. For some > >> > > > > the guide was marxism, but most of us grew up with a form of > >> > > > > Keynesian > >> > > > > guide - the economics of full employment and FDR's never completed > >> > > > > second Bill of Rights. More recently we have reverted to the > >> > > > > control > >> > > > > fraud of banksters and neo-classical economics. I was never much > >> > > > > interested in the 'grand theory' - as a cop I was more interested > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > what people were hiding and lying about, as scientist the grand was > >> > > > > excluded as rigorously as possible a the laboratory door and as a > >> > > > > university teacher I was more interested in developing resourceful > >> > > > > humans than daft, religious managerial theories. As a kid, my > >> > > > > elder > >> > > > > brother and sister always claimed I changed the goalposts in > >> > > > > argument > >> > > > > and as I grew up I discovered this was what argument was generally > >> > > > > about - the goalposts changing name to root metaphor and paradigm. > >> > > > > Experts in argument are bought like lawyers and have about the same > >> > > > > ethics. When Socrates gestures at the Sophists claiming 'I know > >> > > > > nothing, but even this is to know more than they' he is just being > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > smartest guy in the room. > >> > > > > We say 'jaw-jaw' is better than 'war-war' - but there is no crucial > >> > > > > experiment to decide in 'jaw-jaw'. The problem with argument is > >> > > > > that > >> > > > > it needs arbitration if human beings are involved in it and the > >> > > > > seeds > >> > > > > of its own destruction are laid in most people having no training > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > how it is constructed. If you get some training in this you can be > >> > > > > bought like a lawyer as a mouthpiece. Machine knowledge bases and > >> > > > > reasoning capacity potentially offer a democratisation of argument > >> > > > > expertise, manufacturing capability, medicine, finance and much > >> > > > > more - > >> > > > > evidence-based practice for all. In practice, doing management > >> > > > > information systems, one soon learns those currently in the know > >> > > > > want > >> > > > > to keep things that way. I believe the professions are currently > >> > > > > preventing this as surely as those smashing machines in the > >> > > > > industrial > >> > > > > revolution. I believe this is the central issue of the moment - > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > my reasons concern the dream I have of the precipice of disgusting > >> > > > > war,the dullness of politics, religion and literature. Economic > >> > > > > growth is nearly all uninteresting - FlopBook and so on - and > >> > > > > rarely > >> > > > > about the growth of capital I would value. Would we could dream up > >> > > > > something else - and why we cannot when 2% of labour can provide > >> > > > > our > >> > > > > food. I miss any sense of collective dreaming and find only the > >> > > > > loneliness more 'primitive' people I've met would comment on in the > >> > > > > first blush of their experience amongst us. > > >> > > > > On Jan 21, 9:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > > Those who have contributed to the thread have shown me there > >> > > > > > isn't > >> > > > > > much general awareness of the 'technology'. There are already > >> > > > > > intelligent systems like Watson (IBM) doing a fair job on > >> > > > > > embodied > >> > > > > > expert knowledge (medical in this case). The general idea is in > >> > > > > > this > >> > > > > > from New Scientist: > > >> > > > > > In your wildest dreams, could you imagine a government that > >> > > > > > builds its > >> > > > > > policies on carefully gathered scientific evidence? One that > >> > > > > > publishes > >> > > > > > the rationale behind its decisions, complete with data, analysis > >> > > > > > and > >> > > > > > supporting arguments? Well, dream no longer: that's where the UK > >> > > > > > is > >> > > > > > heading. > > >> > > > > > It has been a long time coming, according to Chris Wormald, > >> > > > > > permanent > >> > > > > > secretary at the Department for Education. The civil service is > >> > > > > > not > >> > > > > > short of clever people, he points out, and there is no lack of > >> > > > > > desire > >> > > > > > to use evidence properly. More than 20 years as a serving > >> > > > > > politician > >> > > > > > has convinced him that they are as keen as anyone to create > >> > > > > > effective > >> > > > > > policies. "I've never met a minister who didn't want to know what > >> > > > > > worked," he says. What has changed now is that informed > >> > > > > > policy-making > >> > > > > > is at last becoming a practical possibility. > > >> > > > > > That is largely thanks to the abundance of accessible data and > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > ease with which new, relevant data can be created. This has > >> > > > > > supported > >> > > > > > a desire to move away from hunch-based politics. > > >> > > > > > Last week, for instance, Rebecca Endean, chief scientific > >> > > > > > advisor and > >> > > > > > director of analytical services at the Ministry of Justice, > >> > > > > > announced > >> > > > > > that the UK government is planning to open up its data for > >> > > > > > analysis by > >> > > > > > academics, accelerating the potential for use in policy planning. > > >> > > > > > At the same meeting, hosted by innovation-promoting charity > >> > > > > > NESTA, > >> > > > > > Wormald announced a plan to create teaching schools based on the > >> > > > > > model > >> > > > > > of teaching hospitals. In education, he said, the biggest single > >> > > > > > problem is a culture that often relies on anecdotal experience > >> > > > > > rather > >> > > > > > than systematically reported data from practitioners, as happens > >> > > > > > in > >> > > > > > medicine. "We want to move teacher training and research and > >> > > > > > practice > >> > > > > > much more onto the health model," Wormald said. > > >> > > > > > Test, learn, adapt > > >> > > > > > In June last year the Cabinet Office published a paper called > >> > > > > > "Test, > >> > > > > > Learn, Adapt: Developing public policy with randomised controlled > >> > > > > > trials". One of its authors, the doctor and campaigning health > >> > > > > > journalist Ben Goldacre, has also been working with the > >> > > > > > Department of > >> > > > > > Education to compile a comparison of education and health > >> > > > > > research > >> > > > > > practices, to be published in the BMJ. > > >> > > > > > In education, the evidence-based revolution has already begun. A > >> > > > > > charity called the Education Endowment Foundation is spending > >> > > > > > £1.4 > >> > > > > > million on a randomised controlled trial of reading programmes > >> > > > > > in 50 > >> > > > > > British schools. > > >> > > > > > There are reservations though. The Ministry of Justice is more > >> > > > > > circumspect about the role of such trials. Where it has carried > >> > > > > > out > >> > > > > > randomised controlled trials, they often failed to change > >> > > > > > policy, or > >> > > > > > even irked politicians with conclusions that were obvious. "It > >> > > > > > is not > >> > > > > > a panacea," Endean says. > > >> > > > > > Power of prediction > > >> > > > > > The biggest need is perhaps foresight. Ministers often need > >> > > > > > instant > >> > > > > > answers, and sometimes the data are simply not available. Bang > >> > > > > > goes > >> > > > > > any hope of evidence-based policy. > > >> > > > > > "The timescales of policy-making and evidence-gathering don't > >> > > > > > match," > >> > > > > > says Paul Wiles, a criminologist at the University of Oxford and > >> > > > > > a > >> > > > > > former chief scientific adviser to the Home Office. Wiles > >> > > > > > believes > >> > > > > > that to get round this we need to predict the issues that the > >> > > > > > government is likely to face over the next decade. "We can > >> > > > > > probably > >> > > > > > come up with 90 per cent of them now," he says. > > >> > > > > > Crucial to the process will be convincing the public about the > >> > > > > > value > >> > > > > > and use of data, so that everyone is on-board. This is not going > >> > > > > > to be > >> > > > > > easy. When the government launched its Administrative Data > >> > > > > > Taskforce, > >> > > > > > which set out to look at data in all departments and opening it > >> > > > > > up so > >> > > > > > that it could be used for > > ... > > read more » --
