4 ms·
This sounds more like an argument for systems design. You can easily build models and meta-models that help navigate various scopes. For example the concept of
by themodelplumber 5y ago
This sounds more like an argument for systems design. You can easily build models and meta-models that help navigate various scopes. For example the concept of the long tail is by definition a widely-scoped way of gaining leverage in a situation where smaller details are important.
Traffic control systems, computer hardware design...these all incorporate the same combinations of depth and breadth of thinking. I think it's wise to keep an open mind and ask whether it's really necessary to exclude a given model or entire set of them.
- thoraway66 5y agoYou keep moving the goal posts. You talk right by any argument made. Like infinitely big little numbers, you can string semantic wank together endlessly, producing nothing of value to those that need to eat and cannot. Biology of the masses rules, not 1 of 7 billions personal preference to ramble endlessly. IMO your mind is the closed one. It’s an endless concept deep dive, zero results.
- Retric 5y agoIt’s not a question of excluding the model, it’s a question of the feedback loop where the model is used to both inform your decisions and validate they where correct. Goodhart's law is an adage often stated as "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"
- themodelplumber 5y ago> it’s a question of the feedback loop where the model is used to both inform your decisions and validate they where correct. Who exactly are we criticizing for doing this? Seems a bit like a straw man argument tbh. I'm not even sure how that relates to the more general concept raised above, of a single model of reality being reliable.
- Retric 5y agoIf you want just one example, the IMF uses GDP data for critical decisions and to measure the results of those decisions.