Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#21

Post by bjourne » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

I can only speak for myself, but the "red flags" that you speak of [1-5] aren't very convincing to me. That there are errors in WHOs data isn't surprising, nor that it needs to make pragmatic decisions in trying to get authoritarian regimes to cooperate. That WHOs guidance sometimes is confusing is what you'd expect from a world-wide organization in large part made up of volunteers run on a relatively tiny budget.

Unless you are an expert in epidemology or international humanitarian politics, I don't think the organization you would form would do a better job than WHO. Therefore I'm not interested in helping you.

If you want to help improve worldwide health then you could enroll in one of its many volunteer programs. That way, you would gain valuable experience in how the organization operates which would help you if you decide to create an alternative.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#22

Post by codingdave » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

> easily replaced by an efficiently-operated, software-powered non-profit

No, one of the biggest problems I see in our industry is startups jumping into problem spaces they do not fully understand, and flailing around for a year or so, maybe getting enough people talking to them to refine their product, learn their own market, and finally get "product/market fit". Maybe.

I don't feel that we should try to replace the WHO with such a failure-prone process just because they have some problems. I do feel that you can certainly start down that path with a long-term goal to learn that space and improve upon it... but it will be a journey, not a quick fix.

It cannot be simplified down to: "bureaucracy is broken, lets replace it with some code."

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#23

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:16 PM UTC

MiddTech wrote: post #16

PierredeFermat wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the problem with taking stances. The very act of thinking about such thing is a stance by itself. You can simply take stances that would reduce harm, avoid collapse and (optionally) maximize benefit for everyone. The current stance of WHO doesn't seem to be in that realm and something could/should be done about it. There's no action without a stance.

I'm not arguing that taking a stance is bad per se, i'm arguing that almost anything you might want to take a stance on is subjective. As an example: Reduce harm: depends on perspective (define harm?), timeframe, priorities. Avoid collapse of what?, current society? which one? all of them ? Maximise benefit is the same as reduce harm in its subjectiveness and "everyone" is a big ask given that some perspectives on ce…

I think you already pushed the scenario too far. The best measure to the example you gave is clearly the one we arrived at now. Complete lockdown. Worldwide. There's no discussion about its subjectivity. But the original point/motivation was to avoid getting here in the first place: identify and report potential breakouts early enough. The WHO was too late on this because of the way it's set up and that contributed to getting us to the extreme example you mentioned.

As for subjectivity per se, that's a separate philosophical discussion to me and doesn't have to do much with epidemics. The initital proposition was simple but the discussion drifted (as expected); let's find a better and faster way to prevent outbreaks altogether. There can be no subjectivity/relativity about this - it's a universal imperative.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#24

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #18

PierredeFermat wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Close coordination with the Chinese government :) No, there would (almost) be no policy. That's the point. It's one planet - one health. Which country it is shouldn't matter much. If a severe case was reported by medical staff in Taiwan, North Korea or where ever it would/should instantly show as potential breakout warning signal on some webpage or dashboard, without having to travel weeks through broken bureaucracie…

> If a severe case was reported by medical staff How do you, without any policy or political positions, determine what is or is not “medical staff”?

It's a bit disappointing that all the discussion's momentum/energy here got wasted on the letter of the proposition and not the spirit.

Clearly and pragmatically, anyone certified to work directly with patients at a hospital, clinic, etc. is "medical staff" regardless of where they are.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#25

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:30 PM UTC

kleer001 wrote: post #20

Sounds great. I love it. Sadly I fear that's not really how humans work. Very motivated, intelligent, and well meaning humans have been trying for centuries to decouple function from politics. It's not going to be solved by any technology or technique we have today. But that's only my ignorant opinion.

I don't think it's an ignorant opinion. How do you imagine it being solved?

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#26

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:35 PM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #22

> easily replaced by an efficiently-operated, software-powered non-profit No, one of the biggest problems I see in our industry is startups jumping into problem spaces they do not fully understand, and flailing around for a year or so, maybe getting enough people talking to them to refine their product, learn their own market, and finally get "product/market fit". Maybe. I don't feel that we should try to replace the…

I totally agree that startups aren't the solution to every single problem we have on the planet but I'm not sure you've tackled the original proposition, rather you expressed a general concern/dissatisfaction and that's understandable.

Software-powered != Software-only. Nonprofit != Startups. Propositions != Complete, bulletproof solutions

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#27

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:44 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #17

What WHO does is intergovernmental public health coordination. It is inherently a political function. The decentralized version is just local public health authorities acting without the WHO.

> What WHO does is intergovernmental public health coordination

I'm afraid that's a normative and oversimplistic statement.

Have you seen, at least, the WHO Twitter/FB feeds? It's acting as a teacher for the global public. So "intergovernmental public health coordination" is definitely not its only job, which it doesn't seem to be doing well. There's no disagreement that it's inherently political but in any case, that wasn't a function I proposed to replace in the first place.

> The decentralized version is just local public health authorities acting without the WHO.

That actually goes with the original proposition and that's the way to go. But the early warning system for these authorities is broken - they got their intel too late.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#28

Post by PierredeFermat » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:53 PM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #21

I can only speak for myself, but the "red flags" that you speak of [1-5] aren't very convincing to me. That there are errors in WHOs data isn't surprising, nor that it needs to make pragmatic decisions in trying to get authoritarian regimes to cooperate. That WHOs guidance sometimes is confusing is what you'd expect from a world-wide organization in large part made up of volunteers run on a relatively tiny budget. Un…

I don't think we should just give up to the fact that it's normal to have errors coming from these big Orgs operating at such a sensitive front. Look what some small errors and delays are doing.

If an organisation gets too big to keep its act together, perhaps it's time to make it more decentralized and dynamic (the original proposition).

I also honestly don't think working as a volunteer would really get you to understand how something like the WHO is being actually run.

I'm not an expert (would never say otherwise). But the world is full of experts locked in dogmas and lacks those couragious enough to break free, look stupid and try new things.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#29

Post by aww_dang » Tue, Mar 31, 2020, 2:27 AM UTC

PierredeFermat wrote: post #6

aww_dang wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, state sponsored universities could create some of the same conflicts of interest we've seen with COVID-19.

True. How do you think this could be overcome? Crowdfunding? Donations?

Allow competing voices to coexist without presuming to act as an arbiter of 'truth'. Politics would remain, but the end user could choose.

Re: Ask HN: Is it time to start an apolitical, decentralized version of WHO?

#30

Post by tcbasche » Tue, Mar 31, 2020, 5:10 AM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #22

> easily replaced by an efficiently-operated, software-powered non-profit No, one of the biggest problems I see in our industry is startups jumping into problem spaces they do not fully understand, and flailing around for a year or so, maybe getting enough people talking to them to refine their product, learn their own market, and finally get "product/market fit". Maybe. I don't feel that we should try to replace the…

I think a lot of people in our industry think the solution to an inherently human problem (not to mention one as complex and delicate as health!) is to throw code at it and demand billions of dollars in return.