"scientists are not short-order cooks"

[pscot]

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are about as different stylistically as can be. But when it comes to Internet policy, they're both equally in the dark — and just as willing to dismiss gaps in their thinking by making vague assumptions about America's engineering know-how.

This resort to hand-waving about "brilliant people" is problematic, not least because some of the very technologists whom the candidates invoke to justify their positions are the same people telling them things aren't as easy as they seem. The result is a political dialogue about technology and terrorism that not only evades the complexities of the issues but also increases the likelihood of policy mistakes derived from a misshapen tech worldview.

Clinton and Trump share the belief that technology has a vital role to play in fighting terrorism. Specifically, Trump has proposed shutting down parts of the Internet that the Islamic State uses to recruit people; Clinton wants a way to see criminal communications without undermining the technology that protects sensitive online data ranging from credit card transactions to personal photos.

Although Clinton began answering a question in Saturday's Democratic debate by rejecting the idea of encryption back doors — the idea of requiring tech companies to give law enforcement special access to otherwise protected Internet communications — she pleaded moments later for a "Manhattan-like project" to accomplish, at the very least, something similar.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/12/22/clinton-and-trump-are-looking-for-an-easy-out-on-the-internet-dont-give-it-to-them/

[longship]

1. Of course, Goldman Sachs would tell her no to back doors.

If she listened to them...

[Igel]

2. And some engineers at

Volkswagen were told that they could easily meet the pollution standards by the deadline if they just thought about it.

The standards are never sold as, "Well, if it really hurts the business and puts people out of work, reduces dividends, and rigs the playing field to help certain players, that's just too bad." They're always billed as "achievable" and "goal setting."

VW couldn't meet the deadlines--a bit of info buried in the outrage. So it was easier to achieve form over substance--have the engine diagnostics give the right indications whatever reality was.

Eventually they found a real solution that involved engine technology and not mere software talking to software.

It's the equivalent of standardized tests. A local school district faked tests because there was no way given their resources and "raw material" they could meet the production quality targets. It wasn't for lack of trying. It was then either fail a lot of students and keep them from graduating or goose the numbers. There was dual outrage: (1) that the school district would fake the numbers and put so many students at risk of not graduating or, even worse, having those who already graduated have their college admissions scrutinized; (2) outrage that standardized, one-size-fits-all testing, so unsuitable for many purposes, would mess up hundreds of young mostly black lives.

[pscot]

3. The same kind of wishful thing

is routinely applied to "solutions" for global warming. Even scientists do it.

[uriel1972]

4. Science is hard, much easier to have faith that something else will pick up the tab... nt