http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Friam-Digest-Vol-38-Issue-3-tp522318p522342.html
'livingry' rather than weaponry. How much you need? It certainly
groups to obtain nuclear weapons...
assumptions. No one seems to have recognized that growth systems are
notice. I don't think it's an easy problem.
680 Ft. Washington Ave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: friam-bounces at redfish.com
> [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 7:12 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Friam Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3
>
>
> Phil Henshaw wrote:
> > I think modeling is out of reach, but story telling may not be.
> > Telling the stories of how complex events can be read or
> misread would
> > be a real service.
> There will be policy makers and I think it is safe to say
> they'll find
> it easier to convince people of their policies if there are some
> dramatic stories involved (e.g. 9/11, WMDs). I expect a careful and
> restrained story of the kind you describe above will be
> overwhelmed in
> general by story tellers at think tanks like the Project for the New
> American Century who don't hesitate to provide `leadership' (Perle,
> Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld).
>
> On a technical note, I don't buy that social simulations would be
> computationally prohibitive, given the will. The fastest general
> purpose supercomputer at Livermore is $100e6 U.S. (BlueGene/L) having
> 130k processors. Suppose a simulation ran for a day, that's
> still 130k
> simulations a day. That's a lot of sensitivity analysis one
> could do.
> It might take 10 teams of modelers to keep such a machine busy. For
> national security, what's a $100 million here or there?
>
> The 2006 budget for Advanced Simulation and Computing Initiative
> computing was $661 million and $6.3 billion overall for stockpile
> stewardship. Yet I keep hearing that `non-state actors' the
> new threat..
> > How do you model brains full of made up nonsense??
> Detectives, trial lawyers, and spies tease out models from deceptive
> people and suboptimal evidence. No shame in formalizing
> these models,
> if only to make it clear what is far from being known. And
> to deal with
> a culture that only wants compliance and to stay `on message'
> all I can
> suggest is to 1) stomach it, and 2) slowly bend the message in some
> other direction.
>
> Marcus
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org>
>