4 ms·
Conspiracy theorists tend to mistake incompetence for malice; or partial incompetence for total incompetence. Hurricane Katrina doesn’t invalidate health and bu
by johnwheeler 7y ago
Conspiracy theorists tend to mistake incompetence for malice; or partial incompetence for total incompetence. Hurricane Katrina doesn’t invalidate health and building codes; education; law enforcement and EPA, FAA, and SEC regulations. Decisions made are both bad and good, but it’s irrational to think the decision makers are generally untrustworthy.
- jjallen 7y agoDidn’t all of these agencies come about after some incident happened that was disastrous? The SEC came about after/during the Great Depression. Building codes stiffened after terrible hurricanes.
- johnwheeler 7y agoSure, but what’s your point? Decisions _should_ be based on past information. You don’t expect politicians to be clairvoyant do you? There’s no doubt that politics, especially US politics and government, are pretty screwed up, but it doesn’t automatically follow that anarchy is better. Some of it works and some of it doesn’t. That’s the point I’m trying to make.
- DyslexicAtheist 7y agoI think you have a point because this fear also creates incentives for scammers to profit from it. There is a difference in how people "act" on the collective level (administrative bodies and bureaucracies, even companies) and how we respond on the individual level (employees, bread-winners, family members). There is no serious / open conversation about this inside companies right now - some places I know even discourage you and slap you with the fear-monger label, while hoping it will just blow over. Especially in Tech where we could just send people home right away and work remotely hardly anyone does this (if it hasn't already been policy). > Decisions _should_ be based on past information. Making decisions only on past information is what makes Black Swans a scary reality. Maybe good time for us all to re-read Taleb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan:_The_Impact_of_the_Highly_Improbable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan:_The_Impact_of_...
- hysan 7y agoI feel like there must be some sort of internet law that says, “gross incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.”
- SahAssar 7y agoPretty sure you are kidding, but for the benefit of future readers: > Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
- hedora 7y agoThere’s an obvious corollary: > If you want to get away with it, make it indistinguishable from incompetence. Here’s a WWII field manual from “them” on the subject. It actually helped me unlearn some bad behaviors instilled by previous bad management. :-) http://www.simplesabotage.com/ http://www.simplesabotage.com/
- SahAssar 7y agoBut would you say, in a general sense, that it is better to assume malice rather than mistakes/incompetence/stupidity?
- droithomme 7y agoIf one is responsible for ensuring security, they won't be very effective unless they realize malicious actors masquerading as the incompetent exist and are active.
- SahAssar 7y agoIf I am working on security critical software I don't try to determine the intent of anyone at all, everyone is assumed malicious and their code/actions reviewed as such. My question was in a more general sense, do you assume that all mistakes are done on purpose to conceal some sort of plot?
- Aperocky 7y agoOne of the most glaring flaws of the conspiracy theorists is that they assume authority are bad for bad sake, like they're some mindless evil that does bad thing for .. no apparent reason. Even though the priorities of authority might not be aligned with that of the people, it is still a set of rational priorities, for personal gain etc. Too many conspiracy theorist make no sense because the act they suspect authority do does not make any sense for anybody.
- rblatz 7y agoThis is why you see so many satanic cult/ritual references I. Conspiracy theories. It helps explain evil for the sake of evil.
- WillPostForFood 7y agoIt is perfectly rational to distrust decision makers, it makes no difference whether the intent is malicious or it is just incompetence. The end result is the same.
- johnchristopher 7y agoI trust them to be malicious enough to hide their incompetence. I am working with some, not in a high risk domain at all and I worry the same kind of people work in high risk domains (sometimes they work in both, next election they might move to another minister).