Why you shouldn't let things spiral out of control

The simple fact is: With his plate full with ISIS, the President has no time or resources to deal with Putin. So, Putin knows he has free rein to do whatever he pleases in Eastern Europe. If Obama had kept the lid on problems in Iraq by leaving a small residual force there in 2010, he would be in a better position now to influence events in Ukraine/Crimea.

But, this points up a more general problem with Obama’s foreign policy. By hesitating, by failing to respond in a timely manner to various flare-ups around the world, Obama has allowed each one of them to grow into a significant crisis. So now, focusing on one consumes all his resources, and he must neglect the others. In this sense, North Korea becomes the ally of ISIS, or the Taliban become the allies of Putin: all are working to undermine US influence overall, and, what the one does, distracts Obama’s attention from the others. Thus, does the global world order guaranteed by the Pax Americana crumble because a hesitant Obama has let various small problems spiral out of control.

It is like fighting the Ebola virus. It is much easier to do if you respond quickly and try to nip it in the bud. On the other hand, if you hesitate and let it spiral out of control, then, later on it becomes much more difficult to deal with.

The two Rays

When this Ray Rice thing first broke a couple of weeks ago, I told my son's girlfriend: I don't get it. I don't know why more women are not completely outraged. Pete Rose is banned for life for placing a couple of bets on his own team. This asshole gets suspended for a measly two games for knocking his wife out and dragging her unconscious body out of an elevator?!?

I don't understand why the NFL had to wait for the second video inside the elevator before jettisoning this guy. The first video of him dragging his wife out of the elevator and then standing there looking nonchalant and disgusted while his wife lay on the floor like a limp rag doll was quite bad enough. If, in a fit of passion, I had punched my wife and knocked her cold, I would be on my knees begging her forgiveness, ministering to her, with my cellphone out calling an ambulance. Wikipedia defines psychopathy as characterized by "disinhibited or bold behavior" and "diminished empathy and remorse." By this definition, the violence of Rice's act and the coldness of his response were psychopathic. The NFL should have immediately banned him from the game for life.

And then, after all that happened, the goddamn Niners let Ray McDonald play after he was arrested for domestic violence? Yes, due process must be allowed to take its course, but haven't they ever heard of administrative leave, for goodness sakes? And if the NFLPA sues you, Mr York, suck it up and pay the damages. You will gain far more by maintaining the goodwill of your female fans than you will lose by paying off a lawsuit. And imagine the ignominy that would engulf the NFLPA if they actually did sue.

The NOW nags are going to be out in full force protesting this weekend at Levi's stadium. Deservedly so. What a shame for opening day at Levi's Stadium to be tarnished by such ineptitude in the Niners' front office. What a shame for the entire NFL to be tarnished by their apparent lack of concern for domestic violence.

The post-modern politicization of computer science

In an earlier blog post, I wrote about how the recent report from the Executive Office of the President entitled Big Data: Seizing Opportunities, Preserving Values promotes the ideology of disparate impact. The report also provides a very peculiar politicized definition of an algorithm:

In simple terms, an algorithm is defined by a sequence of steps and instructions that can be applied to data. Algorithms generate categories for filtering information, operate on data, look for patterns and relationships, or generally assist in the analysis of information. The steps taken by an algorithm are informed by the author's knowledge, motives, biases, and desired outcomes. The algorithm may not reveal any of those elements, nor may it reveal the probability of a mistaken outcome, arbitrary choice, or the degree of uncertainty in the judgment it produces. So-called "learning algorithms," which underpin everything from recommendation engines to content filters evolve with the data sets that run through them, assigning different weights to each variable. The final computer-generated product or decision -- used for everything from predicting behavior to denying opportunity -- can mask prejudices while maintaining a patina of scientific objectivity.

The report goes on to say:

Powerful algorithms can unlock value in the vast troves of information available to businesses, and can help empower consumers, but also raise the potential for encoding discrimination in automated decisions. ... For these reasons, the civil rights community is concerned that such algorithmic decisions raise the spectre of "redlining" in the digital economy, the potential to discriminate against the most vulnerable classes in our society under the guise of neutral algorithms.

Thus does the post-modernist poison seep into computer science. Algorithms are "informed by the biases and desired outcomes of the author." Under the "guise of neutral algorithms," software "encodes discrimination" and "masks prejudices while maintaining a patina of scientific objectivity." Compare this politically tinged blather with the precise definition of algorithm provided by Wikipedia:

In mathematics and computer science, an algorithm is a step-by-step procedure for calculations. Algorithms are used for calculation, data processing, and automated reasoning. An algorithm is an effective method expressed as a finite list of well-defined instructions for calculating a function. Starting from an initial state and initial input (perhaps empty), the instructions describe a computation that, when executed, proceeds through a finite number of well-defined successive states, eventually producing "output" and terminating at a final ending state. The transition from one state to the next is not necessarily deterministic; some algorithms, known as randomized algorithms, incorporate random input.

According to the post-modernist ideology: it is impossible for any individual to be impartial; there is no objective truth to be discovered; we can never escape our various "identities" (white, black, Latino, Asian); every action we take or judgment we make is inexorably determined by the prejudices that our identities impose on us. And so, when post-modernism looks at computer science, it arrives at a vision where algorithms can never be objective and impartial, and cannot discover any truths about the world, but simply encode the prejudices of the author (probably a white or Asian male).

It is incumbent on the engineers of Silicon Valley to resist such portrayals of their activities. No software engineer worth his salt will refuse to fix bugs in his software if these bugs are pointed out to him. But, the presumption that software engineers are incapable of rising above their prejudices and only write software in order to arrive at "desired outcomes" is an insult to the intellectual integrity of the Valley.