5 ms·

you don't need recursion, you just need a closed loop. Police A and Police B who police each other besides the ordinary citizens. Add incentives so that they l

by the8472 10y ago

you don't need recursion, you just need a closed loop. Police A and Police B who police each other besides the ordinary citizens. Add incentives so that they look extra closely at the other side.

bryondowd 10y ago
Seems like this would produce some naturally bad incentives. My guess is you would see both sides work the system in concert in a way that protects the 'core' members of both. If there are incentives to 'bust' members of the other team, they could always just hire patsies specifically to be groomed and sacrificed as an exchange with the other side. The alternative is two sides fighting a war of escalation which would likely encourage scary corrupt behavior. "Those guys busted Johnny for some minor offense, so lets go get some dirt on one of their guys, or plant it. Can't let them think they can just mess with us" This is going by the current us vs them mentality of the police forces.
- hx87 10y ago
  > This is going by the current us vs them mentality of the police forces. If that is so, then at least if both "us" and "them" are heavily armed cops with warrior mentalities, they'd focus less of their aggression on the general public.
teddyh 10y ago
To prevent regulatory capture/tit-for-tat/spontaneous alliances, I would think that we need a loop at least three agencies long; Police A watches Police B who watches Police C who watches Police A. We also need proper incentives for all of them to act appropriately. Otherwise they will be either overzealous or lackadaisical.
- belovedeagle 10y ago
  And, you know, you'd only really need one of them to actually police civilians; in fact it's probably better that way. And then you could split up rulemaking and dispute resolution responsibilities between the other two since they will suddenly have more free time. This is a really good idea; why have we never tried this before?! /s
  - teddyh 10y ago
    If one of the agencies has an effective monopoly, it would be almost meaningless to police them since they can't be replaced since they have no competition. (Yes, yes, I know what you meant.)

by the8472 10y ago

you don't need recursion, you just need a closed loop. Police A and Police B who police each other besides the ordinary citizens. Add incentives so that they look extra closely at the other side.

bryondowd 10y ago

Seems like this would produce some naturally bad incentives. My guess is you would see both sides work the system in concert in a way that protects the 'core' members of both. If there are incentives to 'bust' members of the other team, they could always just hire patsies specifically to be groomed and sacrificed as an exchange with the other side. The alternative is two sides fighting a war of escalation which would likely encourage scary corrupt behavior. "Those guys busted Johnny for some minor offense, so lets go get some dirt on one of their guys, or plant it. Can't let them think they can just mess with us" This is going by the current us vs them mentality of the police forces.

hx87 10y ago
> This is going by the current us vs them mentality of the police forces. If that is so, then at least if both "us" and "them" are heavily armed cops with warrior mentalities, they'd focus less of their aggression on the general public.

teddyh 10y ago

To prevent regulatory capture/tit-for-tat/spontaneous alliances, I would think that we need a loop at least three agencies long; Police A watches Police B who watches Police C who watches Police A. We also need proper incentives for all of them to act appropriately. Otherwise they will be either overzealous or lackadaisical.

belovedeagle 10y ago
And, you know, you'd only really need one of them to actually police civilians; in fact it's probably better that way. And then you could split up rulemaking and dispute resolution responsibilities between the other two since they will suddenly have more free time. This is a really good idea; why have we never tried this before?! /s
- teddyh 10y ago
  If one of the agencies has an effective monopoly, it would be almost meaningless to police them since they can't be replaced since they have no competition. (Yes, yes, I know what you meant.)