al_hag 13 hours ago
  • mckelveyf 12 hours ago

    Thank you! Hope you find it interesting!

    • hn_user82179 10 hours ago

      is this your book? thanks for sharing! This isn't at all my domain of knowledge but I have a little unexpected free time on my hands and am excite to learn something new. Your book Internet Daemons looks interesting too

      • mckelveyf 9 hours ago

        Yeah, it's my book and happy to answer any questions too. Internet Daemons is open access too: https://www.internetdaemons.com/

        I'm Fenwick dot McKelvey at Concordia dot ca if you have questions.

boznz 7 hours ago

Thank you for this, I'm going to give it a read.

I am unfortunately very bearish on politics in general. All politicians think short term, look after themselves, their families, their friends, and their interests first; Facts, and working simulations just get in the way. (I am still looking for a politician that is an exception to this rule) Human nature is unfortunately real, and the only way I can see to "solve politics" is to remove human's entirely, but that comes with a whole new set of issues and is another book I guess.

  • blindhippo 6 hours ago

    The Supreme Intelligence has entered the chat... My brain has been stuck on that same thought for decades - wouldn't it be great to have a wholly objective, impartial, and independent governing mechanism to limit the influence of power hungry monkeys and their lackeys.

    A fantastic low to the ground example of the fundamental problems with human politics is seen in American HOA structures and proliferation. It's utterly amazing to me how insanely corrupt a bog standard HOA can get months into it's inception simply do to base human behavior.

    I'll remain bearish on this as well. "Democracy" and collective government has been our species best attempt at this and well...

    • gigatree 6 hours ago

      Bet we’re less than 5 years from that tbh

    • reactordev 4 hours ago

      Make no mistake, America was founded on greed. Our cries for Democracy and Liberty were only so we wouldn't have to pay the King's taxes. We wanted the western native lands that the British promised to protect with hired native americans. The notion that "All men are created equal" only applied to virtuous white men.

      Also, France was eager to give hell to the British and the Colonies were a mere spat in the global theater once France entered chat.

  • gigatree 6 hours ago

    Exactly right, and same for society in general. There’s a degree to which humans work okay in their primitive state (hunter-gatherers, small homogenous communities), but once scaling and technology enters the picture we’re 100% toast without a fundamental recalibration towards genuinely caring for one another.

    • 6510 12 minutes ago

      Not at all, people incapable of caring for others can also contribute wonderfully but they operate entirely different. It is arguably mean to expect our behavior from people who feel nothing for other people and your generosity is weakness to be exploited. They do however have great respect for that what scares them shitless which can be upgraded to unmatched respect if the scary thing helps them when they most need it. Could be a person or an organization. In the old days they have wives. lmfao

  • oezi 4 hours ago

    I get the bearish case but it is easy to forget how much difference good vs bad politics can have and that politics isn't primarily a game of facts. It is an optimization problem under many unknowns and its history is littered with academic theories debunked and hard won compromises.

    • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

      I mean it's debatable that it's an optimization problem but it's been tried. One thread in the book is the reaction the Limits of Growth. That model extrapolated trends, very abstractly, to predict the future. A successor, the Latin American World Model or the Bariloche Model, tried to imagine an ideal world and optimize for it. Very different approaches and a good question to ask when you hear someone talking about computer simulations.

  • left-struck 3 hours ago

    I think a better way to run a democracy might be to have our leaders chosen at random. Sounds like a joke, but I’m serious:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition

    • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

      There is such an enduring link between democracy, elections and math. What I interesting was the focus on trying to model politics correctly rather than "better" with computers. I dug up some good games and programs from the early days that I have to put online sometime.

  • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

    People sure tried. But really the book traces how that happened. I think it became easier to imagine politics working like a computer than with people, like how computer reasoning and rational choice became an ideal to measure other political thought.

throwaway27448 4 hours ago

Can anyone tell me if it acknowledges the dialectic?

  • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

    Its got sublimes for cheap.

ChrisArchitect 14 hours ago

Title is: SimPolitics - America’s Quest to Solve Politics with Computers

  • mckelveyf 14 hours ago

    Thanks! I should have put that in the post in the first place

    • dang 9 hours ago

      We've updated it now, and put the open access link in the toptext. Thanks for posting this!

      • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

        Thanks for correcting!

  • JimsonYang 9 hours ago

    Wouldnt this be a show hn?

    • nerdsniper 7 hours ago

      Not really. ShowHN’s are for interactive things and are supposed to be free and generally shouldn’t require account creation.

      “Reading material” is specifically called out as being off topic!

      https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

      • mckelveyf 3 hours ago

        I was tempted with Show HN, but it also seems more like demos, and this is more a link to an open access book so I thought it was more reading material.