Template:M intro design System redundancy: Difference between revisions

Template:M intro design System redundancy (view source)

Revision as of 10:37, 17 September 2023

614 bytes removed , 17 September 2023

→‎The Moneyball effect: experts are bogus

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,240

edits

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 ====The Moneyball effect: experts are bogus====
-It gets worse for the poor old [[subject matter expert]]s. Even though, inevitably, one has less than perfect information, extrapolations, mathematical derivations and [[Large language model|algorithmic pattern matches]] from a large but finite data set will, it is ''deduced'' — have better predictive value than the gut feel of “[[ineffable]] [[expert]]ise”.
+In the mean time, those [[subject matter expert]]s who don’t drop off altogether wither on the vine. Even though we have less than perfect information, algorithmic extrapolations, derivations and [[Large language model|pattern matches]] from what ever we do have are presumed to yield greater predictive value than any [[subject matter expert]]s’ “[[ineffable]] wisdom”.
-The status we have historically assigned to experienced experts is grounded in folk psychology, lacks analytical rigour and, when compared with sufficient granular data, cannot be borne out: this is the lesson of {{br|Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game}}. Just as Wall Street data crunchers can have no clue about baseball and still outperform veteran talent scouts, so can data models and analysts who know nothing about the technical details of, say, the ''law'' outperform humans who do when optimising business systems. Thus, from a network of programmed but uncomprehending rule-followers, a smooth, steady and stable business revenue stream [[emerge]]s. Strong and stable. Strong and stable. Repeat it enough and it sounds plausible.
+This is the {{br|Moneyball}} lesson. Our veneration for human expertise is a misapprehension. It is, er, ''not borne out by the data''. And in the twenty-first century
+we are ''inundated'' with data. Business optimisation is just a hard mathematical problem. Now we have computer processing power to burn, it is a [[knowable unknown]]. To the extent we fail, we can put it down to not enough data or computing power — ''yet''. But the [[singularity]] is coming, soon.
-Since the world overflows with data, we can programmatise business. Optimisation is now just a hard mathematical problem to be solved and, now we have computer processing power to burn, it is a [[knowable unknown]]. To the extent we fail, we can put it down to not enough data or computing power — ''yet''. But the singularity is coming, soon.
 ====The persistence of rubbish====
 All the same, it’s worth asking again: if we’re getting nearer some kind of optimised nirvana, how come everything seems so joyless and glum?