Posted by
glen ropella on
May 15, 2013; 8:49pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/The-AP-kerfuffle-tp7583146p7583149.html
Nicholas Thompson wrote at 05/15/2013 11:58 AM:
> My mind is a fact-free zone on this issue, but here is my
> believed-in-imagining concerning how AP got the story. Somebody at CIA
> was enormously proud of what “his team” had accomplished and could not
> bear the idea that that such achievements would never be known.
> “What’s the harm?”he thought. The whole operation is over!” But, of
> course, the harm was potentially enormous. (I assume you don’t need me
> to spell that out.)
>
> Now, stipulating …..STIPULATING …. That these facts are as I have
> imagined them, would you all agree that that person is dangerous and
> needs to be relieved of his/her duties … at least until s/he can be
> retrained?
No, I would disagree, at least up to the interpretation of the word
"dangerous". They certainly don't need to be relieved of their duties.
And _everyone_ needs continual retraining. So, that's a no brainer.
I feel the same way about whistle blowers. They are a necessary
check/balance, not so much a danger. If it happened this way, the
disincentivized CIA person is merely expressing the inadequacy of the
reward system set up at all layers: 1) her/his home life (e.g. not being
appreciated for mowing the lawn or doing the dishes), 2) peer group, 3)
social life, 4) job, 5) public service.
That last one, (5), is where Assange, Manning, Wounded Warriors,
narcissist politicians, and John Galts (Johns Galt?) all come into play.
The issue is less about danger to any given group and more about the
confusion between motivation and incentive. Do our soldiers enlist and
do what they do because of the response of the civilians? No. Do the
inventors, movers, and shakers of society do what they do because they
want to get rich and make lots of money? No. Would that putative CIA
employee do what they would because of the artificial incentive
scaffolding nearby? No.
The real danger is conflating incentive with motive.
> And having agreed to that, what powers would */_you_/* grant to the
> Government in their search for whoever that person is.
The primary power I would grant is the ability to grant immunity to
prosecution in the hopes that the person will turn themselves in. But
secondarily, I would grant the government the _budget_ to study and
facilitate the system of feedback loops that bring about a cohesive, yet
agile/adaptive, intelligence organization.
--
=><= glen e. p. ropella
There are ?? coming on now
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com