5 ms·

More like things are getting so complex no one has any clue what good science and tech policy is anymore.

• User23 4y ago
  A big problem is that the kind of people inclined to become government bureaucrats are far from the best people to guide any sort of research effort.
  • liketochill 4y ago
    Because the rewards for being in government are less than in private sector. So we should identify high performers in government and pay them more.
• tomrod 4y ago
  Can you give me an example of how things are more complex today than they were 100 years ago? We have more complex widgets perhaps, but people seem to be the same.
  • tbrownaw 4y ago
    International trade is cheaper and more predictable, so there's a lot more of it now. The economy is just bigger than it used to be, which means it has more room for complexity to live in.
    • tomrod 4y ago
      Perhaps you and I have different definitions of complexity. I identify complexity as increased costs due to an increased action space. In 1920, Jim can wake up and sit in the house or go to work. In 2020, Jim can wake up and site in the house (fiddling with a phone) or go to work. In 1920, Royce has to take 2 hours to iron clothes with an iron heated in the hearth. In 2020, Royce pulls clothes out of the dryer and throws them on a hanger, reducing clothing maintenance for presentability by 75%. Cars in 1970 has simpler systems. Cars in 2020 have more complexity. The additional complexity lets Alice have a higher standard of living, meaning the time traded for maintaining the car herself versus taking to a mechanic is at worst an even trade, at best much less time to drop off. Just because something has grown doesn't mean the cost of actions have increased. Maybe its harder to corner the silver market due to the internet existing, but that really wasn't a desirable outcome anyhow.
      • tbrownaw 4y ago
        But complexity as related to policy design has nothing to do with the how much it costs any one individual to navigate the decision space available to them.
  • sdenton4 4y ago
    DDT is a decent example... A major chemical insecticide that was used /everywhere/ in huge quantities, and was shown eventually to be terrible for all kinds of non-insect populations (like birds) with a tendency to linger in the environment for decades. These days we have a great many more choices of insecticides, and major declines in insect biomass and animal populations. Nailing down the culprit(s) is much harder because while there's a huge amount of spraying, there are far more chemicals to choose from. (The neonicotonoid family of insecticides seems like the best candidate, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid ) and, btw, here's the insect decline follow-up study: https://www.dw.com/en/munich-study-confirms-severe-decline-in-insect-populations-in-germany/a-51052955 https://www.dw.com/en/munich-study-confirms-severe-decline-i... 67% decline in ten years is TERRIFYING. Let's keep in mind that the SDG's include studying and preventing the potential impending collapse of the biosphere...