The "overlearning the game" problem • Hacker News Board

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#61

Post by stdbrouw » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 9:30 AM UTC

wisty wrote: post #53

jacques_chester wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is, and it remains, that the problem is not technological. Is it possible now to instantly poll all citizens, at any moment, on a question of law? Absolutely. Indeed we've had that technology for decades -- since the 50s at least with tabulators and telephones. The point I am making, and which I was originally being downvoted for making, is that technology is not the point . Social dynamics are the point. An…

OK, the Roman system was better, because it had checks and balances. You could do the same with direct representation. Have a constitution, wich can only be modified by a 2/3rds majority. Require a 2/3rds majority to execute philosophers, start wars, and murder the male population of subject states. And Socrates was not just a kindly old Zen master, preaching peace and understanding. He was a bright guy, but as he de…

"some kind of military dictatorship run by philosopher kings" — while Plato advocates this through the mouth of Socrates, most scholars believe it's Plato using Socrates as a hand puppet in this and many other later dialogues, not an actual recollection of things Socrates might have said, as is more likely for some of Plato's earlier dialogues. Forgive me the nit-picking :-)

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#62

Post by erikb » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 9:44 AM UTC

drewcrawford wrote: post #12

If you pay a man by the hour, he'll work a lot of hours. If you pay him by the brick, he'll lay a lot of bricks. These "games" are basically the equivalent of counting lines of code or checkins. We're measuring poor proxies instead of the things we're actually interested in. The solution isn't an arms race to build bigger and better proxies, the solution is to measure real things instead of artificial ones. Here's ju…

It is just very hard to measuer real things. One program is not like the other. How do you want to measure success in a software project, where the result is actually not even clear to the customer?

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#63

Post by david927 » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 9:53 AM UTC

jacques_chester wrote: post #60

david927 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I think you're missing the point: representational government has been gamed . It's not about them being smarter and understanding the laws better (they often don't even read them, but use assistants for that); it's a bottleneck, ripe for corruption. Billions are at stake and only 535 people stand in the way; with lobbying(bribing) being perfectly legal. It's broken. You may not like it, but it's not really up to…

> And I think you're missing the point: representational government has been gamed. It's not about them being smarter and understanding the laws better (they often don't even read them, but use assistants for that); it's a bottleneck, ripe for corruption. Right. If you look elsewhere, you'll see my notes on the particulars of the US system. We have rent-seeking here in Australia, but nothing like the scale of the US.…

And I think it's all bathwater. No more political parties. No more Coke/Pepsi choices of elected officials. No more outright corruption.

Open government, e-democracy. The time has come.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#64

Post by erikb » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 9:58 AM UTC

Many people see this from a macroeconomic or political point of view. So I think adding a more philosophical point of view might also be of value. Of course, because it is philosophy, I can only present my own point of view. There is no right or wrong.

For me, as a Zen student, the solution is to just accept that that it is, what it is. No system (shape, for Zen students) can be perfect. It is created to solve a problem and with time starts to fail badly at doing anything about the problem. Then another system is created by someone else and the cycle restarts. You might think for example that the stock market or democracy is a thing that doesn't change, because it exists longer then you live. But in the end it will change. We had different political systems before and we will develop different systems in the future.

So in the end the system is one of the most important things we have, because it gives us something to base our decisions and actions on and goals to strive for. But also the system is nothing, just an illusion we create for us, maybe based on how we understand the illusions other people created for themself.

The thing that is interesting to me personally is that every system itself is instable and will change or die in the end. But the life cycle of a system, what it does for us and doesn't, that all will always stay the same and even though we try to change that, we will never succeed. So while it changes a lot in one way it is totally unchangable in another. But that just as a side note.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#65

Post by david927 » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 9:59 AM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #48

david927 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it does: laws are held to be constitutional by the judicial branch. Such laws as killed Socrates are not constitutional.

sigh OK then, so who is going to pass the laws that the judicial branch will uphold, and/or who is going to appoint the people in the judicial branch? Are they going to be elected by the same people who elect the officials?

It's a quite well-studied and well-explored area; I encourage you to read more about it. Switzerland, for example, is a direct democracy.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#66

Post by kondro » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 10:34 AM UTC

wisty wrote: post #10

It's related to Goodhart's Law: Any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes. This is often the result of attempting to overoptimize a system. You can optimize a race car to a huge degree, because you know exactly what you want it to do. You can't optimize a schooling system, because you don't know exactly what you want it to do. A little noise is a go…

Bring on the Culture!

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#67

Post by resatori » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 10:35 AM UTC

I think it is time we recognize that it is not the systems that shape our world but the individuals.

There is no optimal system, be it political, economic or whatever.

You can always find loopholes.

I think it is time we take responsibility for what we do - then there is no need for a better system.

The patent system is not responsible for people attacking each other - its the people.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#68

Post by jacques_chester » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 11:18 AM UTC

david927 wrote: post #65

roel_v wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sigh OK then, so who is going to pass the laws that the judicial branch will uphold, and/or who is going to appoint the people in the judicial branch? Are they going to be elected by the same people who elect the officials?

It's a quite well-studied and well-explored area; I encourage you to read more about it. Switzerland, for example, is a direct democracy.

Switzerland is no such thing.

Switzerland is a federation of cantons with a patchwork of different electoral systems with some mechanisms for citizen-initiated referenda.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#69

Post by jacques_chester » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 11:20 AM UTC

david927 wrote: post #63

jacques_chester wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I think you're missing the point: representational government has been gamed. It's not about them being smarter and understanding the laws better (they often don't even read them, but use assistants for that); it's a bottleneck, ripe for corruption. Right. If you look elsewhere, you'll see my notes on the particulars of the US system. We have rent-seeking here in Australia, but nothing like the scale of the US.…

And I think it's all bathwater. No more political parties. No more Coke/Pepsi choices of elected officials. No more outright corruption. Open government, e-democracy. The time has come.

You're a bit of a techno-utopian. In small groups with homogenous polities and aligned interests, this might work. In an opensource project, for instance.

But even those fall into strife. Politics is part of human nature; the encrustations of western civilisation and elsewhere are not arbitrary.

Re: The "overlearning the game" problem

#70

Post by roel_v » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 11:25 AM UTC

david927 wrote: post #65

roel_v wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sigh OK then, so who is going to pass the laws that the judicial branch will uphold, and/or who is going to appoint the people in the judicial branch? Are they going to be elected by the same people who elect the officials?

It's a quite well-studied and well-explored area; I encourage you to read more about it. Switzerland, for example, is a direct democracy.

Of course it's well-studied area, but you make it seem as if that means that there's a 'solution' or even consensus on its effects, which is a position so ludicrous it doesn't even warrant refuting. For the rest, your 'argument' about Switzerland shows that it is you who has no idea what you're talking about.