[extropy-chat] Doubt and About

[Harvey Newstrom]

Robin Hanson wrote,
> Just because someone patents an idea, or keeps it secret,
> doesn't mean that they don't know anything!!  And lots of 
> people who know things try to discourage criticism.  You can 
> know things and dislike peer review.

This is very dubious.  Peer review is required by the scientific method.
People who want to claim scientific discoveries without using the scientific
method or undergoing scientific scrutiny should be viewed with extreme
skepticism.  Basically, they want the world to trust them without providing
evidence for their claims.  This is unacceptable practice.  At best, these
patents must be considered "unsubstantiated" in the scientific community.

> >Can you name an area that used to have this problem and now
> does not?
> >I do not know of any politically charged area or area of
> pseudoscience
> >that has been abandoned by the politicians and quacks.
> 
> Few people defend the Soviet socialist model these days; it
> used to be politically charged, but now people have given up.

This is not an example of science or pseudoscience.  Political "science" is
not the kind of science we are discussing.

> >I disagree.  HMO accountants are NOT more qualified than my
> doctor to treat me!
> 
> But HMO accountants do not treat you.  They decide what the
> insurance company will pay for.  And they are usually 
> qualified to make those decisions.

I am not objecting to accountants making payment decisions.  I am objecting
to accountants making treatment decisions.

My points are about science versus pseudoscience.  Your responses seem to be
in the realm of politics, economics and accounting.  You have not discussed
the same topic that I discussed.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>