Slashdot Mirror
More Complaints About Yucca Mountain
AstroAce writes "I saw this article about the Yucca Mountain Nuclear waste dump, and was doubly intrigued. Not only did I do lab tech work on a YM grant as an undergrad, but my science advisor said the best thing I could do for science would be to become a Congressman, and get hold of the purse strings (remember SSC, the Super-conducting Super Collider?) I think geeks would be the best representatives of other citizens, making detailed, objective analysis of the issues, arriving at rational conclusions and actions. However, they don't seem to be gregarious enough to be politicians. Are there examples of both?"
You think geeks are more rational & objective than other people? You must read Slashdot just for the articles then. Haven't been reading any posts, now have we?
I think geeks would be the best representatives of other citizens
They could be, but not necessarily.
Just as the rest of the world gets caught up in emotional irrational evaluation of how government ought to be run, so can geeks.
Not a few geeks are emotionally involved with science and technology. That attachment can be an asset when it helps to drive scientific progress.
But it can be a liability when it comes time to evaluate whether it is best to spend money on fish or bicycles, which are the kinds of decisions and value judgements confronting elected representatives.
Probably the most significant contribution an elected geek could make is to push in every possible way for the population to become more educated, more rational, willing more to use powers of analysis than to fall back on emotion and feeling. Unfortunately, the latter traits are becoming too well developed because they are useful pry bars in advertising as well as in their long-standing role in swaying political opinion.
Early childhood education programs will really bring the most bang for the buck if you look in the long term.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Uh, yeah, wasn't the internet invented by a vice president, a few years ago?
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
The real problem is that we live in a world with limited resources, both with respect to materials and knowledge. For these reason we tend to listen to those people that sound convincing. The best way to prevent corruption, is to prevent concentration of power. (It is a known law that the power attracts the corruptable.) The main disadvantage of preventing this, is the slowdown of decision making and the danger of bureaucracy. There is a general tendency for concentration of power.
It is also true that those that sound convincing often believe that rational decisions are not possible (because no reliable information does exists) and that their popularity amongh the masses affirm the correctness of the decisions they have made.
One could conclude that the qualities of decisions made in any democratic system can never be greater than the average quality of understanding of the people in that democracy. That is one of the greatest weaknesses of true democracy.
Dude, if my advisor told me that the best thing I could do for science was to get elected to congress, I'd be seriously depressed and/or insulted. He's telling you that you suck, man!