-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy patheschews.html
237 lines (236 loc) · 15.3 KB
/
eschews.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
<html><head><title>niplav</title>
<link href="./favicon.png" rel="shortcut icon" type="image/png"/>
<link href="main.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"/>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
<!DOCTYPE HTML>
<style type="text/css">
code.has-jax {font: inherit; font-size: 100%; background: inherit; border: inherit;}
</style>
<script async="" src="./mathjax/latest.js?config=TeX-MML-AM_CHTML" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/x-mathjax-config">
MathJax.Hub.Config({
extensions: ["tex2jax.js"],
jax: ["input/TeX", "output/HTML-CSS"],
tex2jax: {
inlineMath: [ ['$','$'], ["\\(","\\)"] ],
displayMath: [ ['$$','$$'], ["\\[","\\]"] ],
processEscapes: true,
skipTags: ['script', 'noscript', 'style', 'textarea', 'pre']
},
"HTML-CSS": { availableFonts: ["TeX"] }
});
</script>
<script>
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function () {
// Change the title to the h1 header
var title = document.querySelector('h1')
if(title) {
var title_elem = document.querySelector('title')
title_elem.textContent=title.textContent + " – niplav"
}
});
</script>
</head><body><h2 id="home"><a href="./index.html">home</a></h2>
<p><em>author: niplav, created: 2023-12-21, modified: 2024-09-22, language: english, status: in progress, importance: 4, confidence: certain</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Changing <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_assignment_problem">credit
assignment</a>
mechanisms hurt the people who currently benefit most from the current
credit allocation. They are also usually highest in the status hierarchy,
so they can effectively resist such change. I collect some examples of
that dynamic.</strong></p>
</blockquote><div class="toc"><div class="toc-title">Contents</div><ul><li><a href="#Examples_of_the_Dynamic">Examples of the Dynamic</a><ul><li><a href="#Ignaz_Semmelweis_and_Hospitals">Ignaz Semmelweis and Hospitals</a><ul></ul></li><li><a href="#Intellectuals_Resist_IQ">Intellectuals Resist IQ</a><ul></ul></li><li><a href="#FPTP_and_TwoParty_Systems">FPTP and Two-Party Systems</a><ul></ul></li><li><a href="#Prediction_Markets">Prediction Markets</a><ul></ul></li><li><a href="#Software_Development_Effort_Estimation">Software Development Effort Estimation</a><ul></ul></li><li><a href="#The_Rationality_Community">The Rationality Community</a><ul></ul></li></ul></li><li><a href="#Transitions_to_Clearer_Quantification">Transitions to Clearer Quantification</a><ul><li><a href="#See_Also">See Also</a><ul></ul></li></ul></li></ul></div>
<h1 id="High_Status_Eschews_Quantification_of_Performance"><a class="hanchor" href="#High_Status_Eschews_Quantification_of_Performance">High Status Eschews Quantification of Performance</a></h1>
<!--TODO: hunt down cryptonormativities in here, destroy them-->
<p>In a recent episode of <a href="https://thefilancabinet.com/episodes/2023/02/05/6-oliver-habryka.html">The Filan
Cabinet</a>,
<a href="https://www.lesswrong.com/users/habryka4">Oliver Habryka</a> elaborates
on a very interesting social pattern: If you have a community with high
status people, and try to introduce clearer metrics of performance into
that community, high status individuals in the community will strongly
resist those metrics because they have an asymmetric downside. If they
perform well on the metric, they at best stay in their position, but if
they perform poorly, they lose status. Since they are at least a little
bit unsure about their performance on the metric relative to others,
they can only lose.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Daniel Filan: So let's go back to what you think on your bad days. So
you mentioned that you had this sense that lots of things in the world
were, I don't know, trying to distract you from things that are true or
important. And that LessWrong did that somewhat less.</p>
<p>Oliver Habryka: Yeah.</p>
<p>Daniel Filan: Can you kind of flesh that out? What kinds of things
are you thinking of?</p>
<p>Oliver Habryka: I mean, the central dimension that I would often
think about here is reputation management. As an example, the medical
profession, which, you know, generally has the primary job of helping
you with your medical problems and trying to heal you of diseases and
various other things, also, at the same time, seems to have a very strong
norm of mutual reputation protection. Where, if you try to run a study
trying to figure out which doctors in the hospital are better or worse
than other doctors in the hospital, quite quickly, the hospital will
close its ranks and be like, “Sorry, we cannot gather data on [which
doctors are better than the other doctors in this hospital].” Because
that would, like, threaten the reputation arrangement we have. This would
introduce additional data that might cause some of us to be judged and
some others of us to not be judged.</p>
<p>And my sense is the way that usually looks like from the inside is
an actual intentional blinding to performance metrics in order to both
maintain a sense of social peace, and often the case because... <strong>A very
common pattern here [is] something like, you have a status hierarchy
within a community or a local institution like a hospital. And generally,
that status hierarchy, because of the way it works, has leadership
of the status hierarchy be opposed to all changes to the status
hierarchy. Because the current leadership is at the top of the status
hierarchy, and so almost anything that we introduce into the system that
involves changes to that hierarchy is a threat, and there isn't much to
be gained, [at least in] the zero-sum status conflict that is present.</strong></p>
<p>And so my sense is, when you try to run these studies about comparative
doctor performance, what happens is more that there's an existing status
hierarchy, and lots of people feel a sense of uneasiness and a sense
of wanting to protect the status quo, and therefore they push back on
gathering relevant data here. And from the inside this often looks like
an aversion to trying to understand what are actually the things that
cause different doctors to be better than other doctors. Which is crazy,
if you're, like, what is the primary job of a good medical institution
and a good medical profession, it would be figuring out what makes people
be better doctors and worse doctors. But [there are] all of the social
dynamics that tend to be present in lots of different institutions that
make it so that looking at relative performance [metrics] becomes a
quite taboo topic and a topic that is quite scary.</p>
<p>So that's one way [in which] I think many places try to actively... Many
groups of people, when they try to orient and gather around a certain
purpose, actually [have a harder time] or get blinded or in some sense
get integrated into a hierarchy that makes it harder for them to look
at a thing that they were originally interested in when joining the
institution.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>— Oliver Habryka & Daniel Filan, <a href="https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4NFDwQRhHBB2Ad4ZY/filan-cabinet-podcast-with-oliver-habryka-transcript">“The Filan Cabinet Podcast with Oliver Habryka - Transcript”</a>, 2023</em></p>
<p>This dynamic appears to me to explain many things that currently happen
in institutions, and important enough to collect some examples where
this pattern occurred/occurs, and where it was broken.</p>
<h3 id="Examples_of_the_Dynamic"><a class="hanchor" href="#Examples_of_the_Dynamic">Examples of the Dynamic</a></h3>
<h4 id="Ignaz_Semmelweis_and_Hospitals"><a class="hanchor" href="#Ignaz_Semmelweis_and_Hospitals">Ignaz Semmelweis and Hospitals</a></h4>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis">Ignaz Semmelweis</a>
studied the maternal mortality rate due to puerperal fever in two
different hospitals in the Vienna of the mid 19th century. Finding a
stark difference in mortality rates between the two clinics (10% and
4%), he pursued different theories, finally concluding that the medical
students and doctors in the first clinic did not wash their hands even
after autopsies, while the midwives in the second clinic did not have
contact with corpses. He instituted a policy of first desinfecting hands
with a chlorinated solution and later simple handwashing, leading to
drastic declines in the mortality rate.</p>
<p>However, Semmelweis was derided for his ideas, and they were dismissed
as out of line with the then common four humors theory. Additionally, Wikipedia states that</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As a result, his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Other,
more subtle, factors may also have played a role. Some doctors,
for instance, were offended at the suggestion that they should
wash their hands, feeling that their social status as gentlemen
was inconsistent with the idea that their hands could be
unclean.<sup>[19]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis#cite_note-30">[F]</a></sup></p>
</blockquote>
<p>And:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>János Diescher was appointed Semmelweis's successor at the Pest
University maternity clinic. Immediately, mortality rates increased
sixfold to 6%, but the physicians of Budapest said nothing; there were
no inquiries and no protests.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is quite surprising to me that we still know these numbers.</p>
<h4 id="Intellectuals_Resist_IQ"><a class="hanchor" href="#Intellectuals_Resist_IQ">Intellectuals Resist IQ</a></h4>
<p>Another example is that (arguendo) many intellectuals
place an absurdly high amount of rigor on any attempts to
develop tests for <em>g</em>, and the widespread <a href="https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/">isolated demands for
rigor</a>
placed on IQ tests, despite their <a href="./doc/psychology/iq/the_predictive_value_of_iq_sternberg_2001.pdf" title="The Predictive Value of IQ (Sternberg et al. 2001">predictive
value</a>.</p>
<p>The hypothesis that many intellectuals fear that widespread reliable
testing of cognitive ability could hurt their position in status
hierarchies where intellectual performance is crucial retrodicts this.</p>
<h4 id="FPTP_and_TwoParty_Systems"><a class="hanchor" href="#FPTP_and_TwoParty_Systems">FPTP and Two-Party Systems</a></h4>
<p>A more esoteric example is the baffling prevalence of
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting">first-past-the-post</a>
voting systems, despite the large amount of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasted_vote">wasted
votes</a>
it incurs, the pressure towards two-party systems via
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/Duverger's_law">Duverger's law</a>
(and probably thereby creating more polarization),
and the large number of voting method criteria <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting#Voting_method_criteria">it
violates</a>.</p>
<p>Here, again, the groups with large amounts of power have an incentive to
prevent better methods of measurement coming into place: in a two-party
system, both parties don't want additional competitors (i.e. third
parties) to have a better shot at coming into power, which would be the
case with better voting methods—so both parties don't undertake any
steps to switch to a better system (and might even attempt to hinder or
stop such efforts).</p>
<p>If this is true, then it's a display that high status actors not only
resist quantification of performance, but also improvements in the
existing metrics for performance.</p>
<h4 id="Prediction_Markets"><a class="hanchor" href="#Prediction_Markets">Prediction Markets</a></h4>
<p>Prediction markets <a href="./doc/prediction/markets/the_promise_of_prediction_markets_arrow_et_al_2008.pdf" title="The Promise of Prediction Markets (Kenneth J. Arrow/Robert Fortsythe/Mic
hael Gorham/Robert Hahn/Robin Hanson/John O. Ledyard/Saul Levmore/Robert Litan/Paul Milgrom/Forest D. Nelson/George R. Neumann/Marco Ottaviani/Thomas C. Schelling/Rob
ert J. Shiller/Vernon L. Smith/Erik Snowberg/Cass r. Sunstein/Paul C. Tetlock/Philip E. Tetlock/Hal R. Varian/Justin Wolfers/Eric Zitzowitz, 2008)">offer to be a reliable mechanism for aggregating
information</a>
about future events, yet they have been adopted in neither governments
nor companies.</p>
<p>One reason for this is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prediction_market#Legality">at best shaky legal
ground</a>
such markets stand on in the US, but they also threaten the
reputations of pundits and other information sources who often do
not display high accuracy in their predictions. See also <a href="https://www.overcomingbias.com/p/prediction-market-quoteshtml">Hanson
2023</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A partner at a prominent US-based global management consultant:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The objective truth should never be more than optional input to
any structural narrative in a social system.”</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<h4 id="Software_Development_Effort_Estimation"><a class="hanchor" href="#Software_Development_Effort_Estimation">Software Development Effort Estimation</a></h4>
<p>(<em>epistemic status</em>: The information in this section is from personal
communication with a person with ~35 years of industry experience
in software engineering, but I haven't checked the claims in detail
yet.<!--TODO-->)</p>
<p>It is common for big projects to take more effort and time to complete
than initially estimated. For software projects, there exist several
companies who act as consultants to estimate the effort and time
required for completing software projects. However, none of those
companies publish track records of their forecasting ability (in
line with the surprising general lack of customers demanding <a href="http://www.overcomingbias.com/2006/12/the_80_forecast.html">track
records</a>
of performance).</p>
<p>This is a somewhat noncentral case, because the development effort
estimation companies and consultancies are probably not high status
relative to their customers, but perhaps the most well-regarded of such
companies have found a way to coordinate around making track records
low status.</p>
<h4 id="The_Rationality_Community"><a class="hanchor" href="#The_Rationality_Community">The Rationality Community</a></h4>
<p>Left as an exercise to the reader.</p>
<h2 id="Transitions_to_Clearer_Quantification"><a class="hanchor" href="#Transitions_to_Clearer_Quantification">Transitions to Clearer Quantification</a></h2>
<p>If one accepts that this dynamic is surprisingly common, one might be
interested in how to avoid it (or transition to a regime with stronger
quantification for performance).</p>
<p>One such example could be the emergence of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_Martial_Arts">Mixed Martial
Arts</a> through the
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gracie_challenge">Gracie challenge</a>
in the 1920s and later the
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Fighting_Championship">UFC</a>:
The ability to hold fights in relatively short tournaments with clear win
conditions seems to have enabled the establishment of a parallel status
hierarchy, which outperformed other systems whenever the two came in
contact. I have not dug into the details of this<!--TODO-->, but this
could be an interesting case study for bringing more meritocracy into
existing sklerotic status hierarchies.</p>
<h3 id="See_Also"><a class="hanchor" href="#See_Also">See Also</a></h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://210ethan.github.io/thoughts/eschew.html">Systems to Eschew Eschewing Performance (210ethan, 2023)</a></li>
<li>Discussions
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NAjM4y26yYwKzXA2s/high-status-eschews-quantification-of-performance">LessWrong Discussion</a></li>
</ul></li>
</ul>
</body></html>