[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: The tragedy of the commons
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 11:13:00 -0500
From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]
>Ah, but who gets to be Gardener, and who makes the plan?
The choice of choosing choices.
>And what if an idiot steals the election for Gardener, poisons the garden
>with his friends' petroleum products, and spends all his energy planning
>to defend against the woodchucks rather than watering and fertilizing?
That is your fault. You chose badly. Either you chose a bad gardener
or you chose a system that cannot resolve a near tie (lost in statistical
noise) and therefore punts to another chooser (in the case alluded to,
the supreme court which itself was culled for such choosing: again,
depends on authority to choose the legitimate choices).
>Many prefer confusion to incompetent leadership.
Or many prefer to identify with what is most like their own
world view and will actively eliminate other choices.
> Natural Selection makes
> for messy gardens, but few Gardeners are wise enough to know in advance
> will survive a drought or early frost.
Study projects such as Amodeus
"Interacting Cognitive Subsystems: A Framework for Considering the
Between Performance and Knowledge Representations"
Alison J. K. Green
and look at the issues of representation as they affect expert or
novice approaches to problem solving. You will discover that
many gardeners can and do know in advance what they need to
know. However, choosing a gardener is choosing the system
that chooses. Note the problems of punting to procedural
decision making and issues of oscillation given uncertainty.
There is no such thing as *natural* selection in
the creation of artificial systems. Someone chooses the
choices in advance and then rallies their supporters.
The entire web infrastructure is a political system
and for that reason, the semantic web can follow the
Forbin project outcomes fairly precisely. Deontic
logic isn't precise and context is always local. The
SW depends on elminating local choice of representational means.
Ecological metaphors are just that.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h