Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–56 of 56 posts

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#51

Post by new2628 »

cowboysauce wrote: post #40
new2628 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some nice essays on this concept called "legibility" -- where modern societies hate those systems that are "illegible" in the sense of not being fully mapped, characterized, understood. In most developed countries this is the attitude towards wildlife for example. Unless all migratory birds are counted, their nests photographed, their legs tagged, their beaks measured and catalogued, it is as if they wouldn…

All those things that you've mentioned provide data that is used to measure the health of bird populations and can serve as an early warning if those populations start to drop. Tagging also allows biologists to determine the routes taken by migratory birds. This in turn allows them to determine what areas serve as habitats for the birds and determine if their migratory paths are changing. How do you propose monitorin…

I know that this data is used in good ways. It just points at the greater problem that wildlife is about to exist only in a "managed", semi-wild way.

In my mind "left alone and given sufficient space" is better than "protected and managed". Unfortunately the choice is most often not between these two, but between "protected and managed" and "destroyed".

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#52

Post by jhardy54 »

ip26 wrote: post #42
sebmellen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in context, the whole concept is a bit strange. If I read something like this, coming from just 40 years ago, it would seem absurd. I strongly dislike the urge of modern humans to categorize and analyze everything (very non-tech sounding, I know).

“Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement. If you can't measure something, you can't understand it. If you can't understand it, you can't control it. If you can't control it, you can't improve it.” The quote is specifically about business, but the concept is universal. In the case of this article, Ivan Gayton is interested in controlling disease & improving health. He needs to…

Yes, but "improve" is often subjective, and systems of surveillance and control take away power from people being surveiled and controlled.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#53

Post by renewiltord »

sojournerc wrote: post #50
renewiltord wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one hasn't worked in these places, one lacks the perspective to provide an informed criticism. If it helps one recognize a shortcoming in their world-model, I will share that being known to exist grants superior desired proximate results than being left alone. I'm not trying to convince anyone here, merely broadcasting information that I am privy to which I suspect most here may not be.

What type of work are you doing? In my youth I was a very zealous Christian, and went on mission trips to Peru, South Africa, Honduras, and Mexico. When I reflect back on those times I feel ashamed of my assumptions about the people we were trying to "save". I am now hyper-sensitive to the idea that some ways of living are qualitatively "better" than others. Certainly in South Africa, around Johannesburg the poverty…

Being an atheist, I never proselytized. My job was improving access to TB care. My girlfriend (at the time)'s job was access to banking for the poor in India. One of my close friends' worked to map poor communities so that they were visible to the instrument of the state so that the need for services was apparent. It was all very outcomes-oriented and the outcomes weren't org outcomes but outcomes for the people served. The guys we each worked for ran their stuff well.

There was no religious component to this. Only good outcomes have come from this (and the other two are still doing it). I do not regret doing it except that I clearly have far greater comparative advantage making money and giving it away than doing this myself. Also I enjoy writing code more.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#54

Post by SECProto »

new2628 wrote: post #51
cowboysauce wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All those things that you've mentioned provide data that is used to measure the health of bird populations and can serve as an early warning if those populations start to drop. Tagging also allows biologists to determine the routes taken by migratory birds. This in turn allows them to determine what areas serve as habitats for the birds and determine if their migratory paths are changing. How do you propose monitorin…

I know that this data is used in good ways. It just points at the greater problem that wildlife is about to exist only in a "managed", semi-wild way. In my mind "left alone and given sufficient space" is better than "protected and managed". Unfortunately the choice is most often not between these two, but between "protected and managed" and "destroyed".

I absolutely agree that "left alone and given sufficient space" would be better. But that would involve some pretty serious limits on land development (whether it be for mining, forestry, housing, recreation) - or actually, a lot of land that has already been developed would likely need to be undeveloped.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#55

Post by AmericanChopper »

nitrogen wrote: post #49
AmericanChopper wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this specifically relates to a slightly different problem, which is domain experts viewing their domain as being much more important than it actually is. There’s no reason at all to presume that a cartographer would have anything insightful to say about anything aside from cartography. Society has vested interests in many different areas, but cartographers can only be relied upon to have an interest in furthe…

I don't know, part of me agrees that specialization can lead to shortsightedness, but part of me also feels like this siloing of knowledge and siloing of influence is a way to divide and conquer, ensuring that only a select few have any say in society's direction.

I’d say the siloing is necessary, but your concerns about its consequences result from poor leadership.

It’s a problem that I’m sure most of us have seen play out at work. Companies tend to be divided into specialized departments, but if any of those departments gain too much influence over the rest of the company, things can go badly. Overly influential sales or security departments are a common thing people like to complain about. But if you end up with a company led by its sales team, it’s not really the sales teams fault, they’re just doing their job and advocating for the interests of the sales team. That failure would be with executive leadership, who’s supposed to listen to the advice/concerns of many different groups, each with their own specialized area of interest, and balance all their needs out according to some sort of over arching strategy.

The same thing happens in public policy. For example, police are always going to advocate giving more power to police, because it helps them do their jobs and achieve the goals of their organization. That by itself is not a problem, because the role of government is to listen to those concerns and then to balance them out with all of society’s other interests. If that doesn’t happen to your satisfaction, it’s a failure of government, not of the police.

It’s also one of the reasons why leadership during a crisis or after a tragedy is so prone to producing bad outcomes. Because those circumstances put one area of interest in the spotlight and make it very easy to forget about everything else. That’s how we ended up with the patriot act.

Re: Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

#56

Post by IncRnd »

ip26 wrote: post #42
sebmellen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in context, the whole concept is a bit strange. If I read something like this, coming from just 40 years ago, it would seem absurd. I strongly dislike the urge of modern humans to categorize and analyze everything (very non-tech sounding, I know).

“Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement. If you can't measure something, you can't understand it. If you can't understand it, you can't control it. If you can't control it, you can't improve it.” The quote is specifically about business, but the concept is universal. In the case of this article, Ivan Gayton is interested in controlling disease & improving health. He needs to…

> He needs to measure the population to understand the spread of disease.

Not exactly. He _wants_ to measure the population to understand the spread of disease.

Post reply on HN