Author: manuscrypts

  • Notion States 2

    For a while now – since 2010, I have felt that the nation state (or notion state really) is a shared mental model which is nearing its expiry date. But like other intersubjective realities (money, god), we are reluctant to let go of it. That’s why I found it interesting when Aakar Patel spoke about how nation states are quite inefficient.

    It’s quite true. All you need to do is think about the movement of people and objects and you’ll figure it out for yourself. And while the state has begun using things like Aadhaar to increase legibility about its citizens , and thereby increase efficiency (and further nefarious interests), it is advancing at incremental levels, while the world is moving exponentially.

    Not to mention that the nation state is an instigator and participant in one of the most net-negative things humanity has been continuing – wars! And these days, it’s not just the ‘simple’ human conflicts any more. In the digital space that we spend a lot of time in, and in which we have created identities, state surveillance and deliberate offences using things like ‘zero days’ against its own citizens and enemy states are all contributing to equal if not greater retaliation. In fact, this can actually lead to physical losses too thanks to hacking of power grids, nuclear facilities, healthcare systems and so on.

    So how is this glorified middleman holding on? I think a big reason for the popularity of the nation state is the sense of identity it fosters. Along with religion, nationalism continues to be a superpower. The line on paper is strong even if culture ignores it. Think Delhi and Lahore vs Delhi and Chennai.

    However along came the internet, which has a way of disposing inefficient middlemen. It has massively accelerated the geographical movement of ideas, and increasingly that now includes identity. As Fukuyama points out in Identity, as we moved away from agrarian societies with a strict hierarchy to technology-driven societies with multiple social classes, pluralism, diversity, and choice emerged and identity started becoming increasingly complex. By early nineteenth century, there was a fork – universal recognition of individual rights, and collective recognition. Arguably, Fortnite and LGBTQ rights can increasingly unite people more than a national flag does.

    However, given that the internet has destroyed many things without finding a remotely appropriate replacement, I also began to think of a ‘for’ case. One other relevant intersubjective reality we can learn from is money. In the case of money, once upon a time, different geographies had different systems. Vulnerability in one was of less concern to another. But now, it’s all interconnected, and thus fragile. Even in a nation state dominated system, covid just took over the globe and in addition to lives, had a telling effect on the economy. No country was really spared. So it’s important to ask what would happen if no barriers existed. Is it always good to completely remove friction? There is more. Money is also dependent on the rule of law, and its enforcement by physical force – one of the tasks of the nation state. A big concern with crypto is this enforcement.

    And to now expand this line of thought, what happens to governance? Many evils are kept on a leash because of regulation. Who is accountable for rights and duties of citizens? Minorities might not be in a great place now but without the pretence of the state that pretends to care for them, what happens? What becomes of those who are economically not contributing to the system – the old, the infirm, the less-educated and so on?

    One thought is that there will be a replacement and it won’t be all binary. It will move in stages. For instance, money seeks efficiency too. And it is interesting that money itself, at least in form to begin with, is being challenged by the blockchain. On a related note, our lives are increasing moving into the digital domain, where the nation state’s borders are mostly irrelevant. This means the state’s playbook for regulation cannot be deployed automatically. The worry though is that all this might end up breaking things faster than we can find a replacement, even if it is a notional one!

  • Doom: The Politics of Catastrophe

    Niall Ferguson

    This, if I’m not mistaken, is Niall Ferguson’s fifteenth book, and it shows in the buffet of information and perspectives that the book offers. The title Doom : The Politics of Catastrophe does a good job of not forcing the book into any category. More on that towards the end. It allows Ferguson a free hand in bringing his breadth and depth of knowledge to a bunch of relatively disparate subjects – history, epidemiology, cliodynamics, network theory, economics, geopolitics – all viewed through the lenses of catastrophe and decision-making. 

    Across different chapters of the book, we are fed a rich assortment of disasters – from the eruption of Vesuvius (geological) to the World Wars (geopolitical) to the Spanish Flu and AIDS (medical) to Chernobyl, Challenger, and the Titanic (oh well, hubris) to the recent handling of the pandemic by various nations. It does a good job of showing what we can learn from history (and don’t!) Disaster (mis)management has its own categorisation too – failure to learn, failure of imagination, tendency to fight the last war/crisis, threat underestimation, procrastination. 

    As much as it enlightens, I think it is also meant to provoke – not just the low-hanging fruit like Trump supporters, but even climate change activists (calling Thunberg a “child saint of the twenty-first-century millennialist movement”) and those who support a lockdown as a necessary course of action (which Ferguson seems skeptical about). He is also clearly on the side of institutional incompetence as opposed to individual idiocy. 

    The broad scope of the book, not just on the temporal and geographical axes, but also on disciplines, sometimes made me dizzy. It doesn’t help that in the first few sections Ferguson is reeling out facts and figures like a “this day in history” AI gone rogue, and in one chapter tries to connect Black Swans, Gray Rhinos and Dragon Kings! What loses out in all this is the narrative arc, and patterns a reader could use to make sense of the direction of the book. (Guns, Germs & Steel or the two-part Political Order come to mind as positive examples) 

    I’d also say that the attempt by the publisher to link this to the pandemic was probably belated (after the author had written most of the book), too obvious, and doesn’t do the book any favours as it tries to weld COVID-19 to a general history of catastrophe. That is not to say the book isn’t worth reading. On the contrary, it does a great job of not just historical chronicling, but also uncovers precedents (Asian flu 1957-58, which is missing from most coverage of COVID, but was the closest on many counts), linkages without narrative fallacies, causes (active and latent), and in the end even categorises dystopian sci-fi – the “history of the future”!

    Doom The Politics of Catastrophe

  • How the World Works

    Noam Chomsky

    I think the biggest proof of the US hegemony that Chomsky brings up regularly is how (relatively) unknown he is to the world at large. Because it’s not the kind of publicity the US would like. It’s true that the name has come up in many conversations online, and that is the reason I picked up this book, but for his quality of ideas, he really should be known and quoted a lot more.

    This book serves as a great introduction to Chomsky’s perspectives, not just because of the different topics that have been covered, but also because of how accessible it is – thanks to it being derived from the spoken word through Chomsky’s many media interactions. And yes, the index does help when you want to read about a specific topic and get a quote. There is some repetition, but that is to be expected, and as a contemporary reader, we may not have all the contexts, but that’s also a small price to pay. 

    Of the many topics covered, the US government acting as a bully inside and outside the country is one that’s central. Calling out its usage of government agencies, its military, its allies, as well as international organisations like the UN to enforce its will on nations is what makes Chomsky unpopular. Any nation or leader that attempts an alternate path, especially that is good for the people in the long term, is at the receiving end of many deterrents – local and international – acting in the interest of the US. Because an example is dangerous – it shows that something is possible, countries like Vietnam and many countries in Latin America like Brazil have had to pay the price. All of this became even more easier once the Cold War ended. Though it was convenient to show the USSR as the bogeyman, the US was also good at creating other villains. Within the country, the idea is to ensure that the social, economic and political agenda of an elite class is implemented and also that the general public doesn’t get to have a say in the matter even though it’s supposed to be a democracy. Big business has an important play in this and over a period of time, media which is supposed to be a conscience-keeper, becomes a cheerleader. 

    It’s amazing how well his insights age, as many of them can be used in current contexts. It is also fascinating to see history rhyme – Daimler-Benz and Fidelity as predecessors to Big Tech in holding cities ransom and threatening to vote with their feet if they didn’t get tax cuts.


    On one hand, it is a little heartening that the problems we face now aren’t new. The scale and manifestation might have changed, but the fundamental causes are the same. On the other hand, it does seem that there really is no hope on things getting better – the wealth gap decreasing, or the common citizen getting a level playing field. Chomsky’s view is that these are not laws of nature and that the individual can play a role in changing things, but he points out that it only works if everyone takes the subway. If some drive, it’s going to be better for those who drive! Classic prisoner’s dilemma. When educated classes line up for a parade, he says, people of conscience have three options – march in the parade, join the cheering throngs on the sidelines, or speak out against the parade (and of course, expect a price for doing that!) and that’s been the story for a thousand years and more. 

    I am not sure I have read anyone else who has so much information on things that happened in the world and is able to cite examples for any question asked, is able to convert that into knowledge that connects the assorted pieces, and then deliver such timeless insights. Irreplaceable, I think.

  • A proxy life

    I have forgotten where I first came across Goodhart’s Law. It was probably Farnam Street. It states that “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.” An illustration should help.

    https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law

    In the organisational context, it serves as a great lens to evaluate strategy and progress. As the illustration above shows, the entire direction of a desired goal can be changed when measures become targets. But, and maybe it’s a Baader -Meinhof phenomenon, I am now seeing different versions of it everywhere.

    To set some context, as more and more things have been digitised, the volume of information has just exploded. For instance, before the advent of social media, there were limits to one’s “people like me” canvas, because even an awareness of them was constrained by physical distances and the limits of one’s social circle. It had to be in real life, and public spaces like a cinema or even a vacation spot were probably an extreme. Social media changed that scale massively. Many factors including this volume of information, the lack of a granular understanding of the lives of this new set of people whom you’d never meet, and the innate human desire to do better than neighbours meant that appearances became the norm. Since we are not wired to process such large volumes of information, we dug deeper into ‘measurement by proxy.’ Not that this mode of measurement is new. For instance, we have used material manifestations (apparel, cars etc) as a measure of wealth. The stock price is a single-number measure of everything about the company. But with abundance of choice and the limits of processing power, we started developing heuristics and measuring what was easy. Meta photos (FB/Insta/WhatsApp) became a measure of everything from the quality of life to the strength of relationships. Popularity as a measure of excellence, price as a measure of quality, fitness as a measure of health, #booksread as a measure of erudition and so on.

    How does this connect to Goodhart’s Law? We end up optimising our resources for the measure, not the end goal. Which means that though the goal is say, happiness and a good quality of life, we end up aiming for the measure. From the kind of photo that will get more likes to buying that thing/experience that will surely make us happy. And as we feed this more, the mind keeps on wanting. The happiness fades in a short span of time. And as the Buddha has wisely pointed out, that loss of happiness is what becomes suffering.

    In the AI risk narrative, there is the story of the paperclip maximiser, a seemingly trivial task of maximising paperclips that might lead to “first all of earth and then increasing portions of space into paperclip manufacturing facilities”. The corresponding human version that I wrote in Peak Abstraction was that maybe we will get to a state where, if we get enough likes on the couple photo on Insta, there would be relationship bliss! What a wonderful world.

  • Klara and the Sun

    Kazuo Ishiguro

    “The Buried Giant” didn’t really work for me, so I started reading with a mix of anticipation and apprehension. The lump in the throat as I turn the final pages is what I expect from a Kazuo Ishiguro book, and it most certainly delivered on that ache of profound sadness. It reminded me not just of his earlier book “Never Let Me Go”, but also of Louisa Hall’s “Speak”, which is centred around AI’s evolution around stories and storytelling through time. 
    Klara, an “artificial friend” serves as the narrator in a dystopian future where children are “lifted” for enhancing their intelligence. The world at large seems to have a fair share of tribes and movements, as technology has caused a division of classes in which many are “post employed”. We first meet Klara in the store where she is put up for sale, as an observant MF, who loves watching the world through the store window, and who is devoted to the sun (she is solar powered). She is chosen by Josie, a 14-year old made unwell by the “lifting” process. 

    From then on, we see multiple themes playing out – some human, some human and AF, and some just AF. The relationship between the humans – Josie, her mother and father who are separated, their neighbour Helen and her son Rick (who is Josie’s dear friend), and Capaldi, whose studio Josie and her mother visit for her “portrait” – reveal the different “sides” of their selves that play out on different occasions, their understanding of their own fragility, and their diverse views about how society is evolving. This is closely connected to the humans’ interactions with Klara, which show their mindset towards the AFs, again polarised. Most poignant are the moments with the empathetic Manager. 

    But being the narrator, Klara’s own thoughts and actions are the most interesting. She sees the world in boxes (I wonder if that is connected to how we slot people), she “feels” enough for Josie to be prepared to sacrifice anything for her, and has a hatred for the Cootings Machine, both of which are all too human. Her observation also makes her very perceptive (“I understood that my presence wasn’t appropriate as it once had been,”) even though the humans around her are often not. (Spoiler sentence ahead) My favourite is the deep insight at the end, when she says that Capaldi’s belief that there was nothing special inside Josie that couldn’t be continued was flawed because he was looking in the wrong place – it wasn’t inside Josie, it was inside those who loved her. 

    Ishiguro has a way with prose that allows him to move the story forward without massive plot-changing interventions. And as always, he also manages to keep the reader interested with the layered narrative and wonderful insights that make us human. In this case, the book made me wonder about the time when (I am not sure it’s an “if”) AI becomes sentient/ develops consciousness – would humans be able to understand (Klara’s faith in the sun, for instance), what is the kind of loneliness the AI would face, how would it handle its obsolescence, would it also show different kinds of love (the selfish and the selfless), and yes, can it have a heart – “I don’t simply mean the organ, obviously. I’m speaking in the poetic sense”.

    Klara and the Sun Kazuo Ishiguro