3 ms·
The author misunderstands science, math and engineering. He says "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong," then uses this argument to cite the need to use UBI as
by Geminidog 6y ago
The author misunderstands science, math and engineering. He says "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong," then uses this argument to cite the need to use UBI as "fault tolerance" and cites examples of planes and safety systems.
The irony here is that his statement of whatever "will go wrong" applies to fault tolerant systems as well. You can't deploy redundant safety features without testing that it works.
Is UBI tested to a degree of verifiability that it will always work? No.
Also "testing" and "making arguments" is not strictly the case of engineering. These two things are the domain of science and while engineering can in many cases use "science" this is not what's going on in this article.
Engineering is mostly about using what we already know about in science and mathematics to solve problems.
This article neither uses Engineering, math or science to say anything. It's just a qualitative argument demonstrating an arbitrary point using a bunch of analogies to cast an illusion that this is an "engineering argument."
You need to run a scientific experiment with a control group or observe real world examples to make this argument at all "scientific" or "engineering" related. Until then it's just an opinion.
Whatever your political stance on this policy is... nothing substantial was said here. Just a regurgitation of things we all already know that may or may not be true.
- tharga8616 6y agoAnd economics nowadays have nothing to do with mathematics, because, where is the rational use of resources to provide for everyone's basic needs? So, UBI is just a fist step outside of this wasteful system to acknowledge that economy should serve and preserve the whole human species, and not the other way around.
- Geminidog 6y agoYou can't rationally predict the outcome of complex systems anymore than you can rationally predict the weather or the stock market. In general you need to run something called "tests" to verify certain hypothesis. And even then you may not get a definitive answer given the complexity of the situation. This is not "math" this is the scientific method. >So, UBI is just a fist step outside of this wasteful system to acknowledge that economy should serve and preserve the whole human species, and not the other way around. Communism was an alternative solution to UBI. In fact if you squint enough communism is UBI taken to the extreme, where all forms of income become UBI. Communism in theory works, but in practice there is no working example of a communist utopia in existence today. So you want to turn all of society into some UBI utopia because it fits your political ideology? How about let's not be stupid and run some experiments first.