tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post3429512396902541086..comments2023-10-16T11:28:03.544+00:00Comments on Anomaly UK: A Scale-Free model of reactionary orderAnomaly UKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04780148789321563441noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post-2459739428933672422013-12-17T18:29:51.605+00:002013-12-17T18:29:51.605+00:00I don't think there should be a scale-free mod...I don't think there should be a scale-free model because human governance is highly dependent on scale. The Dunbar number is worth exploring here, and a decent city size surely must be some multiple of it, at least in terms of actual citizens. Dysfunctional governments overreach. Even just school districts- the research allegedly suggests one school/400 students is the ideal size, but we've got massive school districts with multiple schools and thousands of students per school.<br />I don't think governments should be running schools- they are pretty much just prisons now- but they serve as a shining example of overreach here and now.<br />Governments are made for relatively small groups/realms and then they expand without much thought as to whether or not what worked okay for one tiny jurisdiction shall work across the globe.Augusthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08758314961163692341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post-40057884433195085432013-12-16T03:35:50.938+00:002013-12-16T03:35:50.938+00:00No matter what system you begin with -it's not...No matter what system you begin with -it's not possible to have a sustainable equilibrium. What seems to deter any "solution" is the dynamic over time. A unit thrives-is eventually threatened and grows or fades depending on too many factors for any form of governing organization. Let's concentrate on the short-run (in human terms)and it's probably evolving into shorter phases due to technology.The reactionary order that appears to be gaining currently is the Gang run by an autocratic brutal leader.Competition develops & Gangs war with each other until...? Patterns.."Same as it ever was" The Talking Headsgonatlynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post-70221086173529594662013-12-14T22:31:47.353+00:002013-12-14T22:31:47.353+00:00I think I sort of understood what you mean, althou...I think I sort of understood what you mean, although your analogy is faulty. The wiki article explains scale invariance better than I could, but if the results are different at different scales there is by definition no scale invariance. In our case here, a scale invariant model would not include any of the security considerations etc. which introduce various limits (people being not infinitely divisible being one such limit), and would in fact be a good example of spherical cow in vacuum. Thus I feel that this term is not quite appropriate here and, moreover, that we should not try to assume the cloak of the physical sciences by dropping their terms here and there just because they feel vaguely applicable (I have to check my own enthusiasm in this respect, too). For instance, there is a lot to be said for the use of the concept of entropy in history of society, but equally much may be said in warning against incorrect or unwarranted use of the same. Physical concepts are rather fine-tuned tools and require careful handling.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post-47561553729703488972013-12-14T20:35:12.498+00:002013-12-14T20:35:12.498+00:00Well, by “scale free” I mean that the the rules ar...Well, by “scale free” I mean that the the rules are the same at different scales, and that if the results are different, there has to be a reason. I take it as an analogy to physics: if an electron isn’t affected by general relativity, there ought to be a better reason than it just doesn’t apply at that scale. The practicalities of external security dictate the minimum sizes of states, where a single coherent authority is beneficial inside, but need not be outside.Anomaly UKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04780148789321563441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8205333.post-53315784612371590702013-12-14T18:55:43.942+00:002013-12-14T18:55:43.942+00:00Nice analysis, but the resulting model is not '...Nice analysis, but the resulting model is not 'scale-free'. Indeed, since you explicitly invoke economies of scale and diminishing returns to scale, the model is the opposite of scale-free. This result is to be expected from a neoreactionary analysis, because it stresses the particular rather than the universal, whereas scale freedom implies a universality of behavior across a wide range of scales. I don't know quite what Nick Land meant by asking for a 'scale-free' model, but I would propose to avoid the use of scientific-sounding terminology if we don't know what it <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_invariance" rel="nofollow">actually means</a>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com