Draining the Swamp

[The Conservative]

Nassim Taleb has a decent argument that the very idea of centralized intelligence is flawed in a similar way that directed research is usually pointless in terms of whatever goal according to which it is directed.

Probably needs to be more distributed and exploratory. No end goal per se. Just gather intelligence and try to make sense of it different windows.

Have somebody else try to package that into directed intelligence in a similar fashion to how meta analysis is where scientific research really shines.

Centralized intelligence may be fraught with issues, but the way things are now, it's not much better. The left hand doesn't even know what the right hand is doing... or even if the right hand still exists because data isn't shared.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Nassim Taleb has a decent argument that the very idea of centralized intelligence is flawed in a similar way that directed research is usually pointless in terms of whatever goal according to which it is directed.

Probably needs to be more distributed and exploratory. No end goal per se. Just gather intelligence and try to make sense of it different windows.

Have somebody else try to package that into directed intelligence in a similar fashion to how meta analysis is where scientific research really shines.

Centralized intelligence may be fraught with issues, but the way things are now, it's not much better. The left hand doesn't even know what the right hand is doing... or even if the right hand still exists because data isn't shared.

Clearly, what we really need is a single Master database of everyone’s personal information. Then we’ll be safe.

[The Conservative]

Nassim Taleb has a decent argument that the very idea of centralized intelligence is flawed in a similar way that directed research is usually pointless in terms of whatever goal according to which it is directed.

Probably needs to be more distributed and exploratory. No end goal per se. Just gather intelligence and try to make sense of it different windows.

Have somebody else try to package that into directed intelligence in a similar fashion to how meta analysis is where scientific research really shines.

Centralized intelligence may be fraught with issues, but the way things are now, it's not much better. The left hand doesn't even know what the right hand is doing... or even if the right hand still exists because data isn't shared.

Clearly, what we really need is a single Master database of everyone’s personal information. Then we’ll be safe.

What we need is a system in where they keep their databases as they are, but are shared between the entities, so when searching for information it is easily found. What should change though is that depending on their clearance level would depend on the information viewed.

It's not difficult to do, but for some reason government can't even set up a simple database properly with security measures in place.

[Speaker to Animals]

Directed intelligence is no more effective than directed research. It's a mirage. Most intelligence discoveries happen by accident. You are better off having lots of little independent groups looking at all the data they can collect with open-ended exploration as their motive rather than some teleological goal. Insomuch as you would have directed intelligence, it would be limited to managing spies in foreign nations and an intelligence community equivalent of meta analysis in scientific research.

The entire history of directed intelligence is one of failure.

Just like scientific research, the vast majority of successes happened by accident, and it's only later that the bureaucrats and academics fit that into a narrative whereby it's always a product of directed research/intelligence.

It's also dangerous because of the very fact that most discoveries happen by accident. The guy focused on some teleological goal of directed intelligence is likely to miss the significance of a discovery altogether because it doesn't achieve the goal of his work. It's similar to those Mesoamericans dragging huge blocks of stone across the jungle floor while their children played with toy wheels.

In fact, the only major success these directed intelligence agencies have ever really had was lying to their own people to justify wars. If all you want to do is propagandize your population, then create a huge IC bureaucracy, I guess.

[Speaker to Animals]

This is not a trivial observation either. There has to be legions of things we are not seeing right now that will seem obvious after somebody finally does realize the significance.

I mentioned the wheel in Mesoamerica, which was used as a toy, but nobody made the connection that it could be used for real work. Yet even in the Europe where people did grasp the significance of the wheel, it wasn't until the medieval period that somebody figured out you could put a barrel on wheels to move large amounts of grain instead of carrying it on your back like an asshole.

Intelligence is a lot like this too. You have all this information (too much information, really) staring you in the face and you have to figure out what it is telling you about what people are doing surreptitiously. Yet you do not know a priori what anybody is doing. The very idea of directed intelligence implies you should possess some general idea of that, and you merely want to prove what it is. But that's farcical.

[The Conservative]

Directed intelligence is no more effective than directed research. It's a mirage. Most intelligence discoveries happen by accident. You are better off having lots of little independent groups looking at all the data they can collect with open-ended exploration as their motive rather than some teleological goal. Insomuch as you would have directed intelligence, it would be limited to managing spies in foreign nations and an intelligence community equivalent of meta analysis in scientific research.

The entire history of directed intelligence is one of failure.

Just like scientific research, the vast majority of successes happened by accident, and it's only later that the bureaucrats and academics fit that into a narrative whereby it's always a product of directed research/intelligence.

It's also dangerous because of the very fact that most discoveries happen by accident. The guy focused on some teleological goal of directed intelligence is likely to miss the significance of a discovery altogether because it doesn't achieve the goal of his work. It's similar to those Mesoamericans dragging huge blocks of stone across the jungle floor while their children played with toy wheels.

In fact, the only major success these directed intelligence agencies have ever really had was lying to their own people to justify wars. If all you want to do is propagandize your population, then create a huge IC bureaucracy, I guess.

Still need to start somewhere though.

[C-Mag]

It's been 80 days since AG Barr was given authority to declassify. We got nothing.
Maybe Barr is trying to, but I'm not happy with the progress.

Here's an article talking about Barrs troubles, but it's a better indication of how Swampy DC is, and the fact that the powerbrokers of both the Dems and GOP were against Trump. Including the Gang of Eight and the Senate Intel Committee.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... committee/

[The Conservative]

It's been 80 days since AG Barr was given authority to declassify. We got nothing.
Maybe Barr is trying to, but I'm not happy with the progress.

Here's an article talking about Barrs troubles, but it's a better indication of how Swampy DC is, and the fact that the powerbrokers of both the Dems and GOP were against Trump. Including the Gang of Eight and the Senate Intel Committee.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/20 ... committee/

Perhaps he is keeping it close to the chest to keep from suiciding.

[The Conservative]

Grassley, Johnson Release Investigative Findings on Alleged Hack of Clinton’s Server by China

[C-Mag]

I hope this is accurate
‘Early buzz’ on report: Obama’s FBI willfully misled FISA court to commit ‘political surveillance’ of Trump

“[There’s going to be] the emergence of very strong evidence that the FBI knowingly and willfully misled the FISA Court,” Solomon said. “And the US intelligence agencies may have also been involved in what Bill Barr calls ‘political surveillance.’ It’s a term I’ve never heard before. He chooses his words clearly. The term ‘political surveillance” could become very popular this fall.”
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/08/20 ... mpaign=DMS