Increasing Complexity And Violence

The transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age is resulting in a sea change between protection and extortion. As the world gets increasingly complex the result is a diminishing ability to extort while at the same time tools of protection are getting cheaper and more powerful. The arbitrary walls are coming down.

SPECIALIZATION

I was sitting in trial today observing Bill Rounds, co-author with me of How To Vanish.com, as he was questioning a witness. This particular case is an example of complex business litigation that has been up and down the appellate ladder many times. The subject matter is fairly esoteric and even worse the law is unsettled. While unrelated to the case, the plaintiff is a world renown surgeon.

During questioning by Bill’s opposing counsel a funny scene happened. Bill stood up and the judge remarked, “Sustained.” The court reporter stopped and asked, “Was there an objection?” The judge replied, “No, but Mr. Rounds stood up and the coming objection is sustained.”

INCREASING COMPLEXITY

Those 5-8 seconds in the court transcript are but the faintest traces of an incredibly complex thinking process that the two attorneys and judge understood and applied which was backed by hundreds of pages of code and cases. Yet, I am almost sure that neither the surgeon nor the jury even knew there was a virtual ping-pong match being played.

But for the attorneys and judge the surgeon’s work is equally incomprehensible. And the work of engineers, architects, computer scientists, etc. are equally indecipherable to those outside the circle. Such is the modern world that is multiplying in complexity.

Everywhere complexity is increasing from the tadpole in the pond to the manmade computer operating system. But manmade complexity that is beneficial for humanity takes work. Bridges do not design and build themselves. As humanity has progressed so likewise has the economy from hunting and gathering to plows and silos to railroads, satellites and spaceships.

But all this time there have been malefactors and nefarious individuals that seek to destroy and wield violence like a dagger focused on the economy’s heart seeking coercion instead of consent. After all, the power to destroy and inflict pain, while immoral, is power nonetheless. A power wielded by those sadists who enjoy terrorizing innocents.

PROTECTION AND EXTORTION

The irony of government is that it attempts to provide protection through extortion. And like the blackmailer or extortioner the government’s ability to tax depends on the same vulnerabilities as extortion or the Godfather’s offer that can not be refused. As the Industrial Age progressed so likewise the nation-state rose because the assets created were larger and thus the need for protection was greater. After all, the capitalists either paid off those who could leverage violence against them for extortion or paid a military force capable of defending with brute force any attempted shakedown.

But the relentless advance of technology is blunting the sharp edge of violence’s dagger. Protection is being made easier to provide while extortion is being made more difficult to carry out profitably.

Why is this? A basic mathematical law: multiplying is easier than dividing. A simple example is that 3*3*7*11*13 is much easier to solve than reducing 9,009 to its prime components.

Or another example would be encryption. I like the open-source Truecrypt and in June 2003 the US National Security Agency reviewed and analyzed the design and strength of AES-256 encryption finding it sufficient to protect classified information up to the Top Secret level.

In effect, with this free tool I can spend ten seconds encrypting a text file that can take years of focused processing power to decrypt. And just for fun perhaps it only reads “Haha if someone wasted the resources to decrypt this!” But why transmit sensitive personal or business information without such protections? After all, recently 30,000 Hotmail passwords were compromised in a security breach and posted on the Internet. An ounce of prevention using free encryption software can be worth a pound of cure repairing a stolen identity.

PROTECTION IN THE INFORMATION AGE

During the Industrial Age the leverage violence could exert was much greater and is being greatly reduced in the Information Age. Thus the scale is tipping in favor of protection and away from extortion with its attendant allocation of scarce resources through bureaucracy. The digital infrastructure is allowing the previously unseen but highly complex range of systems to be perceived; Facebook is a prime example.

Then that perception is being harnessed in extremely productive ways through multiplication; as a result the economy is following economic law and moving away from inflexible command and control systems towards spontaneous adaptive mechanisms. But government systems still dragoon resources from higher-value complex uses to lower-value primitive uses. As Frederic Lane wrote on page 383-384 of Venice, A Maritime Republic:

Every economic enterprise needs and pays for protection, protection against the destruction or armed seizure of its capital and the forceful disruption of its labor. In highly organized societies the production of this utility, protection, is one of the functions of a special association or enterprise called government. Indeed, one of the most distinctive characteristics of government is their attempt to create law and order by using force themselves and by controlling through various means the use of force by others.

From machines to microchips, factory to laptop, mass production to small teams or even the lone entrepreneur the gigantic institutions of the Industrial Age are being reduced to smaller and smaller parts. As the Information Age advances the risk of violence decreases because as the scale of an operation declines so likewise does its potential for sabotage or blackmail and the increased location independence afforded by the Internet multiplies the inherent safety an asset or individual enjoys. Despite Sulter’s proclamation at 2:08, “I want this country to realize that we stand on the edge of oblivion. I want everyone to remember *why* they need us!” But we, humanity, do not need them even if they think they can clean up some oil.

CONCLUSION

For those who rely on coercion instead of consent the transition to the Information Age is being particularly harsh to their immoral business models. They are now opposing both natural and economic law. The financial elite and political elite of America and Europe are now beginning to infight. This is resulting in the State losing legitimacy in the eyes of the masses.

While the time frame is likely far into the future, first the European Union will collapse and later the United States. But this is not uncharted territory but instead a trend of the nation-state collapsing under its own weight which started with the Berlin Wall and Russia. To avoid being collateral damage I elucidated several tips in chapter six of The Great Credit Contraction.

My next book, which I have co-authored with Bill Rounds, is currently with the publisher and hopefully will be available within a couple months. It will magnify the suggestions from chapter six and I think many will find it tremendously useful. As an old Chinese proverb says, “Of all the thirty-six ways to get out of trouble, the best way is – leave.”

DISCLOSURES: Long physical gold, silver and platinum with no interest in the problematic SLV, Streettracks Gold ETF Trust Shares or the platinum ETFs.

This Century and the Last One: A Report Card for the First 10 Years

When we look back at the sweep of history, the 20th century stands out. It stands out as a time of immense progress in our knowledge, a time of great carnage, and the time when the great debate about socialism and the market economy ended. I think it was Arthur C. Clarke who said that one of two things will come next: either we will look back at the 20th century as the most amazing time when everything happened, or the pace of change will further accelerate thus making the 21st century even more incredible than the one that went by. (Does someone know the exact quote?).

Economists have been arguing that the creation of knowledge responds to the inputs going into it. And there is no question that the number of people engaged in knowledge professions today is greater than ever before in human history. Information technology has added strength to this pursuit, amplifying what a puny unaided human mind could do on its own. Earlier, the West dominated the production of knowledge; now we have phenomena like R&D labs in India giving a new kind of low cost production of knowledge, and increased opportunities for risk-taking in research. These factors should increase the pace of progress of creating knowledge. It should take us closer to the scenario where the 21st century will be even more exciting than its predecessor in terms of creating new knowledge.

I find myself nervously looking around, in 2010, and wondering if we are actually doing that much better.

From 1900 to 1910, here are a few of the great things that happened:

  • In 1900, Max Planck proposed quantum theory, Hilbert posed his 23 problems, and Louis Bachelier was the first researcher in finance.
  • In 1901, Marconi did the first wireless trans-atlantic transmission.
  • In 1902, the first car ride from San Francisco to New York took place, and the Wright brothers flew the first plane.
  • In 1903, construction of the Panama canal began.
  • In 1905, Einstein wrote four papers.
  • In 1906, Mahatma Gandhi coined the phrase satyagraha, and the first `vitamins’ were discovered.
  • In 1908, the first oil was extracted from the Middle East, and Henry Ford sold the first Model T.

I’m sure there were many interesting things going on, but these were the big things of that period that meant a lot to me. When I look back at 2000 to 2010 and … what cool things can we remember which would change the world?

Or is that all sorts of wonderful things have been going on and it is my lack of knowledge? E.g. if I had lived in 1905, I might not have heard about Einstein’s four papers.

If it’s not just me, and the pace of progress has slackened: Why did we not get amazing progress from 2000 to 2010, despite the expansion of inputs into the systematic quest for new knowledge? Are we hitting diminishing returns; are we in the sad stage of adding decimal places to fundamental constants? Is our production function faulty?

The Modern-Day Wealth of Nations?

Revolutionary Wealth: How It Will Be Created and How It Will Change Our Lives. By Alvin and Heidi Toffler. Knopf, 2006. 512 pages. $15.95.

In 1970, Alvin Toffler published Future Shock, an analysis of the accelerating waves of change moving through society. Toffler built on a number of movements already underway both social (the changes he discusses) and conceptual. His analyses of change fit well with other works theorizing change like Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Toffler helped create the profession of futurist and, after 30 years, remains one of our primary futurists.

That said, he strikes a decidedly different emotional tone in Revolutionary Wealth than he did in Future Shock where the term “future shock” itself refers to a baffled and overwhelmed state, close to alienation, that strikes people when they experience too much change too fast. In that early groundbreaking book, Toffler analyzed the changes, explained the accelerating rate of change and warned about the possible effects on humanity. In Revolutionary Wealth, the Tofflers again analyze and explain, but this time, while many individual challenges are identified, the tone is much sunnier. This really is a book about how immense and widespread wealth is moving through global society.

Revolutionary Wealth is an immensely ambitious book. It covers its topic from many different angles, and just about any reader will likely find something of value in its ten sections. These range from discussions of the changing nature of time to how knowledge should be evaluated. Each of these sections is divided into further sub-sections each of which is in turn marked by useful analogies, engaging narratives and schemas that can be applied usefully elsewhere. For example, section 19, “Filtering Truth,” includes a discussion of the “six filters” people use to sift information for credibility. The history and nature of each is explained along with brief illustrations of their relative value and validity (with the Tofflers ending by coming down squarely on the side of the scientific method).

Their embrace of science is part of their larger trumpet call of techno-economic triumph. The core of their claim is that the possibilities offered by information technology multiply the positive effects of all other efforts—that knowledge can be transferred more easily, problems tracked and responded to more promptly, solutions spread across the globe almost instantly and wealth first multiplied, then distributed, in an exhilarating and accelerating wave across the globe. Related technological advances, like mapping the genome (something made possible only through intense computing power), will attack other problems like world hunger through generated genetically modified plants that allow scientists to design crops rather than discover them through slow experimentation.

This integration of information technology is producing, the Tofflers claim, a marked change in the nature of wealth. Wealth had once been primarily tangible: land, gold, etc. It is becoming primarily intangible: knowledge, services, etc. This change is crucial because it becomes “non-rival.” Tangible goods are used up; if one person eats an apple, no one else can. However, intangible goods, like software files, can be used without consuming them. As more of our wealth moves into this category, it becomes “more inexhaustible.”

Heady stuff, and that’s just a bit of what the Tofflers tackle. Their discussion of prosumers (unpaid producers who make up an invisible part of the economy, like volunteers or the contributors to Wikipedia) casts light on just how much formal economics leaves out. Their discussion of the divergent rates of time—how different sections of society not only move at different speeds but also how those speeds are changing—is both intriguing and disturbing. The tensions and inevitable clashes between, say, business and technology surging ahead at one speed and lawmakers and public education system will only get worse.

Revolutionary Wealth is far from perfect. There are several core weaknesses. First, entire sections of this analysis is not particularly new and, in fact, has been made in more focused fashion by others. Second, Revolutionary Wealth is not integrated. An advantage of focusing now on time, now on wealth, now on politics, etc. is it allows one to focus; a disadvantage is that in the real world, all of this slams into one another, and the Tofflers really needed to discuss more explicitly how the myriad factors interact. Third, the optimism is refreshing, but at times it seems to come at the expense of really grappling with, to echo another book’s title, limits to growth. The Tofflers acknowledge dangers like pollution and the energy crisis, but their overwhelming faith in advancing scientific knowledge make these into simple challenges to be met rather than crises that might end the race.

That said, Revolutionary Wealth is a fun ride. It takes the reader into corners of economics that most haven’t visited, and it throws out new and/or useful ideas every few pages.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts