4 ms·

That's true of a lot of things. You really can't allow a system to police itself. Once you allow that, you've essentially given them carte blanche to run a fief

by bena 3y ago

That's true of a lot of things. You really can't allow a system to police itself. Once you allow that, you've essentially given them carte blanche to run a fiefdom.

scottyah 3y ago
But all the other systems are just systems too, and even a system of systems is just a system... Unless we have a God at the top there's no escape from the fiefdoms
- j45 3y ago
  Systems for the many, vs the few can be quite different. It can be different than systems designed for the few instead of the many
- bena 3y ago
  Basically a system cannot be accountable to only itself. There must be an outside entity that can hold the system accountable. However, even if you have two systems accountable to each other, once they realize that there's no third party that's holding the gestalt accountable, they're free to play tit-for-tat and essentially become a single entity. It's kind of why "internal affairs" doesn't really work in police departments. They are part of the same system. If internal affairs clears the police, the police won't mess with internal affairs. And I'm not saying there are easy solutions to implement. Because even if you have an entire web of systems configured in such a way that cooperation among some would be detrimental to the others so they would have incentives to keep each other in check, it would only take a sustained imbalance of power in order for the cooperators to neutralize the others so that they could create their own fiefdom. But anywhere you do have a system that is only accountable to itself, you have a system that is likely rotting from the inside.
bo1024 3y ago
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem." -Douglas Adams. Insularity is both the strength and weakness of academia. Unfortunately, I feel we are sliding toward the worst of both worlds: an administrative "ruling class" that is insulated from consequences, but also allowed to constrain and control the educators/researchers.
- j45 3y ago
  I am not so sure of that anymore. There is some real case for institutionalization and being out of touch with the real world. Add to that where those who can’t do but talk instead moving up in management to stand over the academics who are capable and immensely talented.
- petre 3y ago
  You were quite close to a 1917 style red revolution on US soil. Only the reds wore maga baseball caps that time and most of them were right wingers. Fortunately Trump backed down by the time the FBI tactical teams arrived. I don't think anyone is insulated by consequences, but I have yet to see a former US president go to prison.
  - networkchad 3y ago
    [dead]
j45 3y ago
Right but it doesn’t lessen it being true about this space. Bureaucracies anywhere they exist tend to lean this way, in their own special way. Whether it’s enterprise, healthcare, government, education..

by bena 3y ago

That's true of a lot of things. You really can't allow a system to police itself. Once you allow that, you've essentially given them carte blanche to run a fiefdom.

scottyah 3y ago

But all the other systems are just systems too, and even a system of systems is just a system... Unless we have a God at the top there's no escape from the fiefdoms

j45 3y ago
Systems for the many, vs the few can be quite different. It can be different than systems designed for the few instead of the many
bena 3y ago
Basically a system cannot be accountable to only itself. There must be an outside entity that can hold the system accountable. However, even if you have two systems accountable to each other, once they realize that there's no third party that's holding the gestalt accountable, they're free to play tit-for-tat and essentially become a single entity. It's kind of why "internal affairs" doesn't really work in police departments. They are part of the same system. If internal affairs clears the police, the police won't mess with internal affairs. And I'm not saying there are easy solutions to implement. Because even if you have an entire web of systems configured in such a way that cooperation among some would be detrimental to the others so they would have incentives to keep each other in check, it would only take a sustained imbalance of power in order for the cooperators to neutralize the others so that they could create their own fiefdom. But anywhere you do have a system that is only accountable to itself, you have a system that is likely rotting from the inside.

bo1024 3y ago

"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem." -Douglas Adams. Insularity is both the strength and weakness of academia. Unfortunately, I feel we are sliding toward the worst of both worlds: an administrative "ruling class" that is insulated from consequences, but also allowed to constrain and control the educators/researchers.

j45 3y ago
I am not so sure of that anymore. There is some real case for institutionalization and being out of touch with the real world. Add to that where those who can’t do but talk instead moving up in management to stand over the academics who are capable and immensely talented.
petre 3y ago
You were quite close to a 1917 style red revolution on US soil. Only the reds wore maga baseball caps that time and most of them were right wingers. Fortunately Trump backed down by the time the FBI tactical teams arrived. I don't think anyone is insulated by consequences, but I have yet to see a former US president go to prison.
- networkchad 3y ago
  [dead]

j45 3y ago

Right but it doesn’t lessen it being true about this space. Bureaucracies anywhere they exist tend to lean this way, in their own special way. Whether it’s enterprise, healthcare, government, education..