From: Eric Armstrong <eric.armstrong@eng.sun.com>
Repost of message sent to the org after the first session
on the subject of solving the *pivotal* problems that face
mankind.
-------- Original Message --------
Once again, I was delighted to be part of your recent
colloquium. I was struck, on the one hand, by the
thought that went into the phrasing of the major problems
that were identified. In some respects though, I thought
the list failed to identify some the "pivotal" problems that
tend to keep the others from being solved. In other cases,
I thought that problems were themselves either misstated
or fundamentally "wrong-headed" in important ways.
Herewith, then, my thoughts on the"pivotal" problems.
1. Overpopulation
Our population growth is a dual-edged sword. On the one
hand, it provides more synergistic activity that makes it
possible to solve problems. On the other hand, it is in itself
a fundamental component of the problems that threaten
to swap us.
As one of my colloquium neighbors pointed out, educating
women is a major issue, because that in itself will lead to
reduced population. However, a large number of religions
and political institutions around the world effectively block
that education process. One major question then, is how to
overcome those obstacles.
Solving that problem does not actually produce solutions
for the other problems, but it can help reduce the pressure,
allowing more time to find solutions. The fundamental
issue, there, is...
2. Separation of Church and State
It is a truism, I think, that the largest atrocities in the history
of the world have occurred in the name of religious fanaticism.
--especially if one assumes that persecution of a religion is, in
essence, a fundamentally "religious" act, regardless of the stated
reasons.
In this country, we have long taken the separation of church
and state for granted. But more than any other factor, it is
probably responsible for the relatively high degree of freedom
and the relatively low degree of religious and racial animosity
and persecution that we enjoy. (Granted, we are not in any
kind of ideal situation. But when we look at our situation, we
must agree that the problems have been drastically fewer and
smaller than in many other regions of the world, especially
given the potential provocations.)
In this country, though, we started with a blank slate. The
question is,
how do you get governments based on entrenched religious dogmas
to release their grip, and create that separation? This question is
critical if we are to achieve the worldwide peace we need to
solve the problems that confront us.
3. Separation of Business and State
However, while we have achieved a relatively clear separation of
church and state, we have not achieved a similarly clear separation
of business and state. When our government was founded, "business"
did not exist as the kind of institution it is today. So our
forefathers
can be forgiven for failing to provide for the separation, but it
remains
a fundamental -- and extremely pivotal -- problem in the world
today.
The last 50 years have been an intense education in the ability of
business to make short-sighted and ultimately self-destructive
decisions in the name of profit. The tobacco industry immediately
springs to mind, but so does much of the food processing industry,
not to mention many activities which are otherwise illegal.
In the world of law, we understand the necessity to limit the
actions
of individuals to prevent their self-aggrandisment by harming
others.
So we outlaw stealing, drug peddling, and the like. What has not
been established so clearly is the necessity of influencing the
economic playing field -- using taxes, sanctions, and subsidies, as
well as laws -- in order to ensure that people and companies can
follow their own short-sighted interests freely, *without* having
to
worry about ultimately adverse consequences.
In other words, the government should act like the organization that
creates the rules for the game and the referees that maintain order
on the field. That activity ensures that teams can pursue their
self-aggrandizing policies as aggressively as they wish without
inflicting irreversible harm on the other players.
In our current system of government, however, big business
contributions and the lobbyists who stalk the halls of congress have
a tremendous say in our policies and how they are enforced. In
effect, the inmates are in charge of the asylum -- a situation that
produces short term results for industry, but which works to no
one's ultimate advantage.
The question then arises, what does it mean to separate business
and state? This is a question that deserves -- nay, requires --
serious investigation and which needs answers. More evidence
on that point will be appearing in the next message, "Regarding
Several Critical Problems". In the meantime, here are a few ideas
on *how* to separate business from politics to prime the pump.
(It's not clear to me which ones are most likely to be efficacious.
The subject requires a lot of study, and possibly experimentation.)
* Debate and Personal-Appearance Only elections
Perhaps all forms of advertising, other than individual
hand-held
signs and buttons, should be abolished. Elections might then
be
decided on personal appearances, press coverage, debates,
and the ability to motivate individuals, rather than
sound-bites
billboards, and 30-second advertising slots.
* Eliminate the "Everyone Should Vote" idea
Probably the most insidious idea to undermine a democracy is
the concept that everyone *should* vote. Everyone should be
*able* to vote is a reasonable idea. But to make everyone
vote
is simply to institute government by ignorance. In such a
setting,
it is no wonder that they guy with the most advertising
typically
wins. I'd much rather have an election by 10,000 people who
*care*, than by 1,000,000 people who are effectively pulling
levers at random. Otherwise, as Plato stated in the Republic,
instead of people listening to the ship maker when it comes
to
building a navy, they are swayed by rhetoricians like
Demosthenes.
* Plato's Republic
Plato held that the rulers should be cared for in perpetuity,
never
have to worry about income, and be disallowed from gathering
wealth for themselves. He felt this would clear their heads
so they
would worry about the people without distractions. It's a bit
idealistic, but it's an idea.
* A voting elite
Maybe voting should be in the hands of a set of people who
have
earned that privilege, in the same way that they take a
driving test.
Perhaps a similarly bottom-line capability to distinguish
between
spurious and valid arguments should be required. Like a
driving
test, the questions would not require a degree in logic, but
test
truly basic reasoning ability with questions like, "Which is
most
important in selecting a candidate: a) The policies they
pursue,
b) The color of their clothes, c) How good looking is their
spouse,
d) What kind of car they drive?
* A voting non-elite
Perhaps anyone that makes more than $N should not be allowed
to vote, or contribute to elections! Maybe money has enough
influence on policy that the best way to provide an
additional
"check" to balance that influence is to eliminate it totally
from the
voting process.
* Non-profit corporations
Perhaps the day of "profit" has come and gone. If all
corporations
were required to be "non-profit", what effect would that
have?
Would they raise salaries of their employees, increasing
purchasing
power? Would they purchase more themselves, stimulating the
economy? Would they donate more money to charities and fund
more "public works" projects?
Details of this kind of proposal need to be worked out, of
course.
Perhaps dividends should count as an expense, for this
purpose.
That way, if a company is making a lot of money but
distributing
it to it's shareholders, it is not accumulating the kinds of
obscene
profits that tobacco industry has, for example. Similarly,
perhaps
something like "6 month's operating expenses" in the bank
should
not be construed so much as profit, but rather as a
contingency
fund against adverse economic conditions.
* Meritocracy
Steve Forbes has an arrangement with his kids -- when he
dies,
the bulk of his wealth goes to charity. They will have had
the
advantage of the best possible education, in addition to
their name
and many great contacts, but what they make of themselves
will
still be fundamentally up to them.
If this policy were enshrined as part of the political
system, then the
wealth might possibly provide a "safety blanket" for every
citizen
that allows them to go to college or start a company (while
living
in no-frills dormitory, perhaps). Such a policy would put an
end
to the never-ending process of the rich getting richer, and
likely
produce a more equitable distribution of wealth based on
ability,
persistence, and effort rather than family fortune.
4. Abstract Knowledge Mathematics
We face an exponentially growing body of information -- much of
which is redundant, superfluous, or vacuous. We drastically need
the kind of "symbolic logic" that was explored earlier in this
century
in order to:
a) Reduce the amount of information we need to store
b) Create a computerized knowledge system that humans can
interact with successfully
It is likely that the Open Hypertext System would benefit greatly
from
the use of an abstract "knowledge mathematics". But producing such a
thing is a deep theoretical problem that requires our very best
minds.
We have made such huge advances in relational and object-oriented
databases, however, that it could conceivably be possible today to
manage the complexity of such a system. At bottom, the problem is
about specifying things, relationships between them, and the evidence
for those relationships, in such a way that we can reason about them
at multiple levels of abstraction.
For example, it is equally true to say that "essential fatty acids
account
for cell membrane permeability" as it is to say, "This omega-6 fatty
acid,
in a phospholipid base, manages the transport of the oxygen molecule
past the cell wall and into the cell." The same knowledge base needs
to
be usable for supporting and generating propositions of either kind,
either more abstract or more refined, as need dictates.
One advantage to having an abstract knowledge representation will
be the ability to operate in any number of spoken languages.
So "a --> b" becomes "a implies b" in english, but something else in
Swahili. That would allow people from around the world to contribute
to
and use the same body of knowledge, unimpeded by language
restrictions.
(On a bleaker note, given the depth of the problem, it is not clear
that
there is sufficient time to develop such a system and make use of
it.
It may therefore make more sense to use an existing language,
despite
the value of a more abstract representation.)
5. Man/Machine Symbiosis
This, clearly, is one of the most critical problems we have. We have
*still* to define, much less implement, a really powerful symbiotic
capability between man and machine.
For example, one of the attendees at the seminar pointed out that
seven years after graduating, 50% of a doctor's education is out of
date. That is extreme! Much better then, would be a system where
doctors routinely consult computerized databases for the latest
information. But how should that interaction occur? What is the best
mechanism? These are questions that need addressing.
One possible way for approaching the problem is to set up games.
One game, for example, might be to diagnose and treat a computerized
patient. Teams of doctors, individual doctors, software programs,
and man/machine combinations could then attempt to treat the
patient.
The patient would simulate a response to each intervention, and the
players would react. Those who save the most lives would "win".
Such a game would be open to all comers, with the goal being to find
the most effective combination of man and machine. The winners,
besides earning bragging rights, would provide the model for all
kinds of man/machine systems -- a model that would be further
refined each year with advances in interface designs and computing
power.
Summary
---------
Several "pivotal" problems were identified, and some thoughts on
each were expostulated. Next: "Regarding Several Critical Problems".
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
Independent contractors: Find your next project gig through JobSwarm!
You can even make money by referring friends.
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/jobswarm2 ">Click Here</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community email addresses:
Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 18:56:37 PDT