Prolog

I wrote this in September while on an almost two-week vacation in Spain. It was a phenomenal vacation. It was very likely the best vacation ever for my wife and I. We went to five cities: Barcelona, Madrid, Granada, Ronda, and Sevilla. The grandest highlights were the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona and a La Liga match in Sevilla. It was a tour that was organized byRick Steves, which made for a spectacular and memorable trip.

As fate would have it, when I returned to work, the shit hit the fan. So, I never posted it. In short order, the blog was taken down. I decided to retire from Sandia. Before I get to explaining what went down, I wanted to give this post some air. I’ll post the details of what happened tomorrow or the day after. I’m sure many of you can imagine what happened, but I promise to provide a few surprises too.

I do remember starting this vacation a few days early. At the last meeting I attended, the management provided another jaw-dropping and repulsive remark. They declared the shock physics at Sandia to be world-class and state-of-the-art work. Neither is remotelytrue or supportable. That said, that could be true in the future with proper support and decent leadership. Neither the necessary support nor the leadership is in evidence. More on what they do have tomorrow. The prospects for world-class work are thus dim to negligible. The state of the art will continue to elude them, too. It can be foundelsewhere and seen by those with a modicum of respect for knowledge.

More on the reality of all ofthis later. For now, enjoy the time capsule that follows. I do see the shadows of the events that drove me out of Sandia here. In a deep sense, one can simply see the outcome as an inevitable outcome of what was already present. I justneeded to accept the truth and reality.

tl;dr

I have lived most of my life believing expertise is a good thing; being an expert is a very good thing. Recently, this belief has felt under assault. Today, expertise is a source of suspicion and seems almost despised. Once trusted, now experts are suspects. True, even where I work. Experts are now treated as pariahs. In the workplace, an expert is surplus to requirements and a pain in the ass. Our present workplace wants drones. People who do what they are told to do faithfully without question. Management knows best. The ideal employee is a competent and compliant servant to the management. The mantra is don’t think, don’t question, and simply do your assigned work. If you do well, you might become a manager too.

Travel is magic

“The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.”

― Marcel Proust

I spent the last 12 days traveling outside the USA, across Spain. We went through a set of glorious cities and towns. We sank into a different culture and its deep history. Travel is such a magnifying glass on home, and good god the USA is a mess. Spain is a former empire, and it spent decades under fascism. It perhaps portends America’s future. For ill. The march of authoritarian rule parallels that of Franco in horrible ways. Now seeing it recovering, there can be hope too. It is civilized in ways the USA is not today. It was great to see a nation that isn’t descending into madness. By all accounts, Spain isn’t perfect with its regional nature and healing from decades of fascism, but compared to the USA, it is lovely.

“The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page.”

― St. Augustine

Spending a few days in Barcelona, which is clean and has only a few homeless compared with the teeming masses in the USA, is the first impression. As an American, the homeless seem to be a screaming siren of societal collapse. They are the weakest and most vulnerable people, and America is failing them. It is something that should be far more troubling, but America has a cruel streak. Our societal cruelty becomes evident in comparison to what we see in Spain. The treatment of the weakest and most vulnerable says volumes about us, and we are not good people. America is a rich, spoiled nation unable to protect its most needy citizens. When viewed through the lens of another country, we should be ashamed.

In spite of this horror, Americans seem proud and believe they are exceptional. At least this is the mantra of our current leaders. We believe we are free. In Spain, people seem much freer and happier than Americans. Decades of oppression under Franco seem to have sharpened their sense of freedom. Under Franco LBGTQ people were oppressed. Now the community is out, open, and proud. They had decades of oppression, and I see the USA headed for the same. So, perspective is found in difference.

“Wherever you go becomes a part of you somehow.”

― Anita Desai

One of the greatest contrasts between the USA and Spain is the emphasis on the individual versus the community. In Spain, community is key; in the USA, it is all about the individual. This mentality has been amplifying for the last 40 years. It is the product of the neoliberal era and the power of the “cowboy” imagery. Both of these themes were key to the “Reagan revolution” and have amplified over these decades. The result has been an increasingly selfish and greedy culture. As noted, American culture is full of cruelty and arrogance. For me, the USA is increasingly embarrassing. It has become a source of horror as the truth of contrasts is evident.

These have also created a hierarchy in society where the managerial class has power and sets direction. This power is being harnessed towards acquiring more wealth and power. It is naturally self-amplifying. The level of inequality in the USA is approaching the highest in history. Ultimately, the decisions that create this dynamic are bad for society as a whole. Our current status is unhealthy. This will create failures and instability. Reality will eventually assert itself and probably be brutal.

America is headed for disaster. The national leadership is driving us off a cliff. Lots of “experts” are playing along because it is good for their short-term success. It is good for their bank accounts, too. Greed is good. Since we don’t prize community, fuck everyone else!

“I never travel without my diary. One should always have something sensational to read in the train.”

― Oscar Wilde

Expertise is Supposed to be Good, but Experts are a Pain in the Ass

“An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them.”

― Werner Heisenberg

So, as it becomes obvious that America turns its back on experts, their value becomes obvious in Europe. Experts can save your ass. You want your tour guide or bus driver to be an expert. If you are working on nuclear weapons, you want experts. I am an expert on important aspects of the science of nuclear weapons. The observation of late is that my employer could not give a single fuck about my expertise. Any expression of expertise is treated as a nuisance and irritant. The details an expert sees are simply a difficulty that would rather be ignored. This observation seems like utter madness. The important thing to understand is why we ended up here.

My startling revelation is that the USA is turning its back on expertise everywhere. Even in a place where the institution is responsible for our nuclear weapons expertise is a liability. It almost boggles the mind that knowledge is not prized by such a place. That said, this explains what is happening society-wide. Experts are full of difficult and complicated details, and why bother? The fundamental problem with experts is that they get in the way of what managers want to do. They provide details and facts that tend to change what the managers want to do politically, or spend resources (money) in a desired manner.

What the experts often bring to the table is enormous amounts of nuance, subtlety, and detail. These aspects of any given topic are a bane to decision makers. These represent every bit of difficulty our managerial class seeks to avoid. Our managers bask in simplicity and ignorance. Thus, the nuance offered by experts is a toxin and is met as an unwelcome intrusion. The sort of complexity and subtlety is equally revolting to managers. Most often, they seek to solve problems by brute force and raw power. The deft skill offered by expertise annoys their aims and offers challenges they want to ignore.

What I’ve learned is that the managerial class wants a few things. One is power, and usually, money is power. Under any given manager’s reign, they want unbridled success; all is always well. Most problems or issues can simplybe messaged away. Their unspoken hope is that any problem’s effects will come due after they’ve moved on. If this can”t be done, the goal is to find scapegoats. Problems are never the manager’s problem. The buck never stops with them. All we see with the Trump Administration is this attitude taken to its logical extreme. The same behavior is commonplace with our ruling class. Those of us under their rule have come to accept and even expect this shit.

“The key to greatness is to look for people’s potential and spend time developing it.” – Peter Drucker

How the Ruling Class Uses Experts?

There are those who use modest expertise to gain power. The other route is one of luck, where the expertise simply assists and aligns with the whims of power. We see two breeds of successful experts these days:

1. The lucky expert who just happens to be aligned with managers, and the managerial directions,

2. The useful expert who trades their credibility as a shield of legitimacy to the managers.

In one case, you are simply fortunate that reality is with you and success is virtuous. In the second case, the expert becomes the tool of the ruling class. Our modern archetype is almost the entire Trump Administration. Worse yet, the expert is totally optional, and a simple loyal hack is substituted.

Any expert who does not fit this mold is cast aside. If you want success and to share in power, either luck out or shred your integrity. Often, the lucky are clueless about their bounty. They simply happened to align with the stars. They found or stumbled into the path to professional success in a way that resonates with the direction of society. To be blunt, there is nothing wrong with this. For me, personally, I see any computer hardware and software experts fit this mold. They were needed to fuel the push to exascale computing. They are also needed to fuel the push for general artificial intelligence. Their work is useful even if both of those endeavors have serious issues with the balance of efforts. The best version of these initiatives would use other expertise better. A balance of expertise would fuel a far greater program of achievement.

This is the perfect segue to the other type of expert. These are the sellouts. These are those who apply their expertise to support the managerial class. They sell their credibility as a way to underpin the desires of the leaders. It is a way to success. They promote the whims and desires of the leaders with an air of legitimacy. As these whims and desires become worse, their crimes become greater. Their expertise gets warped into excuses for terrible management. The Trump Administration is simply a perfect and hyperbolic example. The problem is all over, and it is eroding the Nation’s future. In other words, lots of these turncoats occupy positions of respect across our most important institutions. They make the excuse of being realistic while actually annihilating credibility.

What Happens When the Experts Disappear?

“Often a sign of expertise is noticing what doesn’t happen.”

― Malcolm Gladwell

The past 40 years have been a slow and continuous extinction-level disaster for experts and expertise. Rather than the experts being a fact-based limit on the management class, the experts are being removed. The only experts seen are the sellouts or the useful resonant ones. Their role is to provide a dash of their reputation to support the idiocy of the management decisions. I’ve seen it in the science programs supporting our national security. The end result is less security and the decline of a great Nation. Our current crisis as a nation is simply this process drawn to its natural conclusion.

A secondary effect is the reduction in expertise. There is simply less expertise because it isn’t a useful thing for those in power. Factual foundations for policy have become antiquated. A large part of enabling this process is a former largess of expertise and achievement. We have had enough achievement in the bank to make massive withdrawals. We can experience a massive decline before we drift into incompetence. My fear is that the incompetence has arrived, or will soon. Look at our National leadership, which is teeming with incompetence. The real qualification is being servile and obedient to the boss, no matter how stupid an idea is. This spirit is passed down to every level below. Those seeds have already been sewn and are blooming all over with a stench.

“Enthusiasm is more important than innate ability, it turns out, because the single more important element in developing an expertise is your willingness to practice.”

― Gretchen Rubin

Expertise and the process of achieving it work against giving in to this. Being a true expert is an immense amount of work. It is an investment of time and passion. Invariably, it also involves joy and the pursuit of truth. All ofthese characteristics work against sacrificing this to serve the idiot leaders. Nonetheless, many do trade their expertise for success and power. I often see people who spend their early years professionally gaining expertise. Then they trade their expertise for success (money) or join the management class. Today’s leaders have lost the taste for expertise, as it often works to oppose the politically determined direction. The core issue is that reality often opposes the desired political outcome.

Of course, a great deal of the idiot leader’s motivation is based on a philosophy that opposes fact. In the USA, this shows up in attitudes toward sex. American sex education is structuredto oppose reality. The emphasis on abstinence only denies every reality of sex. Young people are biologically driven to have sex. Sex can provide great pleasure if done with intention and knowledge. Sex builds the connection and intimacy necessary for relationships. American sex Ed avoids all of this in favor of demanding abstinence outside of marriage. The result is an education program that leads to worse outcomes. For sex, this means more unwanted pregnancies and sexual disease. The entire program is motivated by religion rather than any objective fact. Simultaneously, experts in sex are attacked. They are denied sources of income and support. Society as a whole is harmed, and people are denied one of life’s great joys.

It is Too Late For Me

“Be yourself; everyone else is already taken.”

― Oscar Wilde

I am not suited to be a drone. I never have been. My ability to express an independence of action and thought has grown over time. It has always been present. That said, I have always had a sense of duty and responsibility to the good of society. I am a team player, although always focused on excellence and success. Thus, the leadership today is focused on their success, not the team’s. It is the same at work and especially nationally. Take the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, where only violence against the right was condemned. It is not about all our success; it is only the success of the boss.

I have come to the conclusion that my expertise has become a liability. If I were to trade my expertise in service to the management class, it would benefit me. On the other handmy personal integrity would be sacrificed. This is the decision offered me by our society. Deny reality and facts when they oppose the direction chosen by leaders. Do not criticize stupid decisions and directions. Do not point out when the managerial messaging is bullshit. This is the way to succeed. I’ve chosen the way of truth and the ability to like myself. It is too late for me to change.

“They’re certainly entitled to think that, and they’re entitled to full respect for their opinions… but before I can live with other folks I’ve got to live with myself. The one thing that doesn’t abide by majority rule is a person’s conscience”.

–Harper Lee,

The other way to succeed today is to simply avoid the knowledge that would oppose management. Simplybecome a drone who does what is asked. Do not question the direction; simply serve the direction. Even when the directions are idiotic, you simply submit and do your job. This goes with the lack of committed careers and the job that you have for life. You are simply a commodity. The only way to avoid this is become a manager. In such a system, experts don’t naturally grow. Worse yet, being an expert is a horrible moral burden. At work, you are serving ends that are at odds with what you know is correct.

As my wife would quip, “Sell your soul.” The route to success these days is to sacrifice your integrity. There should be little doubt that this is evidence of how trust is under assault societally. We know innately that our leaders lack integrity and are untrustworthy people. It was a choice I did not make. I could not. I had to look at myself in the mirror.

“Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be. Be one.”

–Marcus Aurelius

“It is easy to live for others, everybody does. I call on you to live for yourself”.

– Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?” ― Mary Oliver

I was thinking that it’s been about four months since I posted something on the blog. That means approximately 12-16 blog posts have been denied to my readers. I’ve been denied writing. Writing is thinking, and that hurts. The upshot is that there are lots on my plate that I want to share with all of you. Hopefully, I can remove that logjam and throw out some provocative and interesting ideas. I know a few of them are very timely, particularly with the expanding AI bubble and the impending enshitification of the AI itself. The current management incentives are leading to the enshitification of the National Labs. American science is enshitifying too. The whole fucking country is enshitifying.

The basic issue around AI and our national strategy is that it inherits some of the stupid ways of structuring programs that I’ve seen in my career. It is also doomed to failure. It is doomed to recreate the same loss of preeminence to China that has infested our research community. Over the last few years, China has clearly beaten us. In science, the Chinese have surpassed the USA in most areas. The reality is, we are beating ourselves. It is an own goal.  Enshitification is one of the topics foremost in my mind. I have come to realize it applies to institutions, including those that I spent my career working for. It’s an important concept that I think has a wider scope than is appreciated. It goes well beyond the internet, although nothing is really separated from that force.

“If you want to double your success rate, triple your failure rate.”– Cory Doctrow

I have five or six blog posts queued up right away. They just need the final markup and to be posted. I’ve continued to write since September, but my belief is always that writing is to be reador it justbecomes lazy. I write for myself in a journal, but it’s simply not the same. In the last four months or so, since I stopped publishing, so much has happened. The symmetry between what I saw at the lab where I worked, and our national shit show has become so clear. It is hard to keep up with events. The magnitude and gravity of events make writing seem transient and out of date.

Here is a rundown of what is on tap for the next few weeks:

1. Experts or Drones, written in September while I was on vacation in Spain.

2. The two episodes that forced me to stop writing the blog

3. The Enshitification of Everything

4. V&V: Past, Present and Future

5. Almost TVD schemes, a path forward to high order and high resolution?

As always comment and let me know what’s on your mind too!

“Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life’s coming attractions.” ― Albert Einstein

tl;dr

I stopped because of threats. “They are coming after you,” I was told. It also showed me who I worked for clearly and the necessity of distance from them. I don’t have enough life left to tolerate people like this. They have little or no integrity. That said, today our leadership is full of low integrity and untrustworthy conduct. Behind this lack of integrity are incentive and permission structures that encourage bad behavior. I could not tolerate being silencedany longer. I have already lost too many days to this.

“There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed.”― Ernest Hemingway

Why did it disappear?

In brief, I needed to find a safe space to speak. I could not speak safely while working. Sad, but true. My useful work is about thinking and speaking clearly. Writing is a means to do this, and I was being denied it. I was threatened bymy employer. It is a fairly pathetic stance of a weak and fragile controlling management. It is also a broad and common situation in corporate America. Workers are weak and powerless. Management is tightening its grip on institutions. Management is too often characterized by low-integrity behavior. They have a permission structure for this from the corporations, and they act on it. This itself is damning. This fact forced me to choose retirement. The censorship, explicit or implicit, feels like a very modern American tale. You would think it is un-American.

We see the same phenomenon nationally on both the left and the right. It takes different forms, all of which are toxic. Both sides practice “cancel culture” that weaponizes shame. The government is increasingly censoring via power and punishment. Corporate governance is the same.  They fear the voice of the voters or the workers. Social media and the Internet should give everyone a voice. Corporate interests, the government, and power all fear this. Instead, social media is a way to make money. It is a way to sell us shit. It is a way to create outrage that divides us. All because anger and outrage drive engagement and profit. All of this damages us. Under this sort of leadership, our collective future is grim.

“There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you.” ― Maya Angelou

Where does the blog go from here? We need to discuss current events!

“The purpose of an organization is to enable ordinary humans beings to do extraordinary things.”– Peter Drucker

First things first, I am retired as of now. So the blog is back. Rather than forcing you to read between the lines, the reasons for each of these developments will be explained in detail in the coming days. Stay tuned! The details of what happened will be explained. I will get to exactly what happened.

That said, there are themes that thread my personal reality with the national shit show. Part of this is the desire of those in power to kill the voice of the common man. True, whether it’s the public or the employee. You see people being executed by federal officials for the offense of filming their public conduct. This alone shows the raw power of video evidence. That power is something that those in control want to take away because it threatens them. This is far more brutal than my personal experience, but entirely consistent with my manager’s behavior.

One of the things I hated the most about my colleagues at Sandia was their giving in to the basic assumptions of their lack of power. That, of course, employees don’t have a voice. Of course, managers will lie to us about the state of work. It seems to me that the rank and file in society have turned away from any active part in their own lives. They are simply surviving. They simplyaccept their lack of power and actually become accomplices to the authoritarian impulses. These impulses emanate from corporate America and the government itself. The message is like the Borg’s “resistance is futile.” If it is, we are fucked.

I’ve been spending a lot of time since the middle of September, when I took the blog down, trying to figure out what happened. There’s a lot to analyze there. I made mistakes for sure, but I also acted with integrity. That integrity was not matched by the management. I grossly misread the situation. My management was committed fully to mediocrity. I am happy stop resisting the pull of their incompetence. I am glad to be away from where I was and no longer under their heels. Worse yet, is the realization that the terrible management has implicit permission to act with little or no integrity.

“I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche

There is a profound symmetry between those expressions of societal power. This provides the basic permission structure that gives the management the right to act with low integrity. Our national leaders seem to embrace the same permissions provided by the electorate. In both cases, their behavior only corrodes any institutional trust. All this means is that everyone in a position of leadership is fundamentally untrustworthy. It leads to a society that is devoid of trust, which is where we are today. It is only getting worse. We are at the point where most of us expect to be lied to or bullshitted.

The thing that sticks with me the most is that underlying all of this damage is a lack of trust. This lack of trust pervades society and has been replaced by a focus on money. Thus, the trust in the labs as high-integrity arbiters of technical and scientific quality is gone. The same can be said of each branch of government. Whether it is the court, the congress or the President, money is ruling and swamping trust. In its place is a simple subservience to money and no earned trust from the nation.

The way we are treated by those in leadership is frankly insulting. As adults in our regular lives, we have to confront real problems directly. We can’t paper them over or bullshit our way through them. We have to act on reality and deal with it. Then you go to work, and you’re treated like a child. The same is the treatment of us as citizens. You see crimes on the news and are told that what you can see is false. You’re told total bullshit and obvious fictions about what’s happening. You are never offered the truth. In the process, these leaders escape all accountability. I saw it for years at work, and now every day on the news.

These “leaders” treat us like children. As an example, it is similar to parents who try to give some euphemism around a pet’s death. Sort of the ‘Buster went away to live on the farm’ instead of making the child face the realities of life and death. In that example, the child is denied learning and growing opportunities needed later in life. The leaders do the same to society or institutions. Progress and innovation needed to overcome the reality are sacrificed along with the truth. This dynamic is driving our society and its institutions backwards.

The irony in this is that the subservience to the dollar will yield a continued decline in trust. This will lead to something that breaks the system completely. In the final analysis, we’ve created a system that undermines the best in people and draws out the worst in them. Taken together, the lab violates its (sacred) responsibilities to the nation in the name of money. This mantra is thrust upon the labs by the nation. Therefore, the outcome is simply preordained. The work will have technical or scientific integrity that is sacrificed at the altar of the dollar.

It comes down to the proposition of who and what is in control. Is it the managers? Is it the executives? Or is it our principles and values? Today, it’s the managers, and it’s the executives. They are violating our principles and violating our values to achieve their aims. This gets to one key conclusion that I have about how our management behaves today: The reason is that the incentives are all wrong. The incentives are all about money. It demands the regular and complete violation of principles and values. Today, successful management opposes the proper execution of the Lab’s mission if it gets in the way of money.

“An incentive is a bullet, a key: an often tiny object with astonishing power to change a situation”― Steven D. Levitt

One of those things that I value deeply is the prospect of exposing our work to peer review. In fact, the episode that catalyzed the end of my career was all about peer review. The problem is that the incentives our management has today do not align with peer review. The management can only deal with a peer review that is unremittingly positive and only nibbles around the edges of problems. If the management gets a peer review that exposes problems and is negative, their reaction is deep, emotional, and often retributive. That retribution fell on me, and it was the thing that caused me to decide to retire. I can no longer work with people whose principles and values are so completely divorced from my own.

I want to be clear. Not everyone who is a manager or executive is the problem. The problem is that far too many managers and executives are encouraged by the incentive structures to do the wrong thing.  They are rewarded for doing the wrong thing. As a result, more and more managers and executives now behave in ways that are counterproductive to our basic principles and values. In that direction lies the seeds of disaster. One final bit I want to be perfectly clear about: this is not a condemnation of Sandia National Laboratory. This is a condemnation of the system that the laboratory exists in and the system we have created in this country. What happened to me and what is going on at Sandia National Labs is a reflection of what is wrong with this country.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.”― Laurence J. Peter,

Part of writing in the era of AI is to make sure that what I write is seen as authentic. So part of that authenticity is to say a fair number of not safe for work things. Things that are anti-establishment, anti-institution, and just generally shit that an AI wouldn’t say. As you probably know, AIs are tuned to provide words and text that feel like it’s appropriate for our corporate overlords. As a result, the humanity and authenticity is drained out of its output.

The issue is that the non-technical topics are addressing things in the way of progress. Good technical and scientific focus is inhbited bythe actions of those managing us. In retrospect, I can see how it did for me. Now, I can explore some of the bigger ideas. In my time at Sandia, I did not pursue ideas because it was not work-related. The lack of innovation at Sandia is a direct result of how the Lab is run. The culture of Sandia is antithetical to progress. Judging by the state of American science this may be everywhere, not just Sandia. The frightening thing is that other places are much worse. Few places are better. With the advent of AI the lack of progress and focus is potentially catastrophic for society. In the process of our collective incompetence, we have been surpassed by China across the scientific enterprise. Togethe,r these are the recipe for disaster.

Closure and Path Ahead

“You’d think solving mysteries would bring you closure, that closing the loop would comfort and quiet your mind. But it never does. The truth always disappoints.” ― John Green

This post is going to seem very angry because I am very angry. Frankly you, dear reader, should be angry too! The reasons for my anger actually affect the entire citizenry of the United States . We all depend on these institutions I’ve worked at for a safe, reliable, and effective nuclear deterrence. At a time when our nation needs more expertise and better execution of scientific and technical work, we are getting systematically worse. The mediocrity of our premier research institutions is about to have a huge real-world impact. The importance of AI for our economy and national security is growing. We are not at a state that is capable of meeting the moment we are in. Today, it’s merely a footnote in a tidal wave of societal decline and dysfunction.

The institutions that I’ve spent my entire professional career at are in free fall. They are in free fall because of mismanagement that focuses on the wrong things. They are not delivering to the nation the responsibilities to which they’ve been charged. Unfortunately, the nation itself is at fault. Our national culture is extremely broken and the culture at the labs reflects this. We have a lack of trust for all our institutions, and from what I’ve seen, where I’ve worked, that lack of trust has been earned. It has been earned because they don’t do the hard things they need to do to fulfill their responsibilities. In fact, what I see is a management system that marches us steadfastly towards mediocrity. Excellence should be demanded by the citizens.

To be clear, the assault on these institutions is bipartisan. There is an attack on excellence and efficiency from all quarters of society. On the Left you have over-regulation and an assault on risk-taking that has destroyed innovation. From the Right you have an attack on knowledge and a governance that focuses on money. This is a society-wide problem, not something that falls into the simple narrative of Left versus Right. Much of the lack of focus on continued excellence is due to arrogance, a belief in the supremacy of American science. That supremacy has evaporated in the face of this incompetent governance. My contributions can actually get better now that I’m retired!

  I don’t think the tenor or content will change. I do expect the amount of technical content is likely to increase. Perhaps this is logical. Perhaps it’s paradoxical. I still have great interests and ideas. I want to keep myself busy with passion projects involving physics and math.  Over the long term, this is sure to change, albeit slowly. I won’t have the day in and day out “inspiration” from work. A lot of the reason for retiring is that work was thoroughly uninspiring technically.  The rest of the world and the American carnage will provide plenty of great themes to work on. I am sure that I’ll rapidly have over 400 posts total.  It’ll be at 385 total as of today since 2013.

“Write even when the world is chaotic”– Cory Doctrow

In the coming week, I will be far more expansive on the reasoning and the backstory around my decisions. I have a short post on my plan for the near future. I also have a relevant post I wrote back in September while on vacation in Spain. For now, I hope some of you welcome my return to the public square.

Writing is essential to me, and I won’t stop again.

tl;dr

There is a lot of bad news these days. Most people in power don’t want to hear about it. That is, unless it helps them. If they can’t kill it, they want to spin it. What is missing these days? Solutions, answers, and explanations are all missing. It is hard to locate when we lost this, but we have. The issue is controversy and point of view. Solutions, answers, and especially explanations are all loaded with both. They are complicated and the purview of experts. Society-wide, experts have been rejected. Worse yet, experts have standards. Today, the rich or powerful want to control things, and experts aren’t controllable. The real issue is that solving problems will work against powerful interests. Their power is vested in keeping those problems unsolved.

“Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done, and why. Then do it.” ― Robert A. Heinlein

There’s A Lot of Bad News

“Nothing travels faster than the speed of light, with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.” ― Douglas Adams

Things are not going well. The nation is in a multitude of crises. These go all the way from disappearing democratic norms to authoritarian rule. The growth in homelessness is a painful warning sign of societal stress. Inequality is growing. We aren’t sure if AI is a job destroyer or a massive investment bubble primed for a crash. The globe has several conflicts where masses of innocents are being slaughtered. To make matters worse, the USA seems to be on the side of those killing most of the innocents. The time is not good.

Meanwhile, if you listen to the US President, all is great. At least due to his actions, everything is awesome and great. Peace is around the corner. The economy is fantastic, and we will just sweep the homeless away. They’re not real people we care about. Democracy is optional and something to be controlled. His rule is notable by the appointment of sycophants and boot lickers to every post. Any dissent or admission of fault is punished. Only “yes-men” and Trump-cheerleaders are allowed. Moreover, if you cross the President, the retribution and punishment will be extreme, and use the full extent of executive power.

For a while, I thought this was a horrible example for all of us. Terrible leadership that will begin to seep down to society. The last six months have completely changed my view. The bad leadership has already become lodged in the bowels of society. I see it where I work and the places I am close to. The behavior is not as egregious as Trump’s, but echoes it. Bad news is never accepted, and if it can be hidden or spun changed. The problems underlying the bad news are often ignored. Why put effort into solving a problem that can just be messaged away? The mantra seems to be that reporting bad news is simply bad for whoever reports it. Plus, fixing problems is often difficult or a pain in the ass. This is doubly true if the boss’s dumb decisions caused the problem.

The result is a logjam of problems everywhere. The dam is going to break, and it’s going to be awful. Most leaders know they will be out of the way then, and some other poor SOB will be holding the bag.

“An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field.” ― Niels Bohr

Experts are Threats; Reject Them

“Throughout history, people with new ideas—who think differently and try to change things—have always been called troublemakers.” ― Richelle Mead

Of course, this post was inspired by something. Speaking broadly, it is the rejection of expertise by my institution. Worse yet, it was recognizing that expertise is being rejected by society. We see it at the highest level of government. Our top government jobs are currently filled by totally incompetent people (RFK, Hegsheth,…). Their only qualification is their subservience and loyalty to the President. Any expert who disagrees with them is simply a nuisance, or worse yet, an enemy. The advice will be rejected, ignored, or attacked if it doesn’t meet the demands of the incompetent leader. The problem is that this rot is present where I work, too. It’s probably elsewhere, as my engagements with Los Alamos have indicated.

I have come to realize that experts are not valued by my workplace. The depth of the problem has been sinking in. It has been a pretty awful realization. My current employer puts a very dim value on expertise. I have substantial expertise in a bunch of specific areas of interest to the Lab’s mission. There is no effort for me to transfer any of this knowledge as I step toward retirement. After retirement, the Lab basically tells you to get lost. At Los Alamos, retirees seem to have value, but I wonder if that will persist. At Sandia, they are definitely surplus to requirements. You feel this attitude growing as a dark cloud as you get older. This attitude has gotten more acute of late. It has found currency in a series of events.

Recently, there was a report of a study that found some problems with codes. I was a subject matter expert who reviewed the report. It was good work and the results were high quality. They were correct and even expected. The only missing element was explanations of the results and corrective measures. The manager responsible for the codes didn’t like this and basically censored the report. They made a bunch of critiques of the report. These critiques were naive and signaled a lack of expertise. Nonetheless, the censorship continued despite no technical veracity of the issues. The political desires were overruling the expert. Again, this is consistent with the basic values of Sandia.

Given Sandia’s responsibilities as an institution, you should all be alarmed. This is how they act. It is the culture. It is the management. It is the staff. At a recent project meeting, someone asked a question about computer codes at other labs. It is something I know a lot about this topic, so I spoke up,

“I’m an expert at that.”

The meeting moderator quipped, “Well, don’t you think a lot of yourself,” in a sneerin,g dismissive tone.

I thought to myself, “Go fuck yourself.”

Fortunately, the person asking the question contacted me outside the meeting. I could answer the question without this horrible disrespect. At least he wasn’t an asshole and just interested in answers.

Still, I was getting a firm read on the culture and attitude. Experts are something we don’t need around here. Granted, the meeting was for a code that is a living indictment of our nation’s gap in science and technology. It is used broadly in National Security work, and it is not a good thing. They could use an expert or three. The problem is that an expert would tell them that the code sucks. They would have to do something about it instead of being legends in their own minds.

“A society that gets rid of all its troublemakers goes downhill.” ― Robert A. Heinlein,

Bad News is Not Welcome; It will be Punished

One of the big issues with bad news is how it is given. It is often just naked bad news without context or explanation. This problem will likely get worse as the news gets worse. A “Holy Shit” bad news is harder to deliver with nuance. The reaction rapidly tends toward “Oh fuck!” Worse yet, those who deliver the bad news are simply punished. They serve as an example to others: “Keep that bad news to yourself.”

The most important fact to recognize is that our leaders don’t want bad news. The leadership class is increasingly filled with pathetic self self-serving people. They are not responsible for the stated purposes of their jobs. They are not responsible for the people working for them. They are not responsible for the future. Their responsibility starts and stops with themselves. They manage up and only care about their own well-being. They are not trustworthy. For years, we have worried that we cannot trust our leaders. Today, we truly can’t; our leaders are craven liars who exist within a system that punishes responsible action.

“For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert.” ― Jasper Fforde

What I am seeing is a system that corrodes people. Well-intentioned people are hired into the system. They either become the problem or the system ruins them. Good people either become shadows of themselves or are ejected from leadership. I have seen it over and over where good people either become bad or leave leadership. When a bad person goes into leadership, they thrive and get worse. All the feedback is corrosive. People in leadership positions learn to be worse versions of themselves, or can’t lead. At this point in my career, I know many of the leaders in my World. Invariably, the good people are made worse. The bad people are monsters. The monsters become demonic.

Just think about the monster in the White House. A horrible person who is becoming worse with all bounds removed from any bad behavior. Notably, shooting the messenger is now the law of the land. What a horrible example!

Maybe we simply can’t give bad news anymore. This is simply not sustainable. With no bad news, no problems are ever solved. We are kicking every single problem down the road. Let tomorrow’s leaders solve it. We can see it in the massive budget deficits and debt. No current leader has any investment in the future of the Nation. The same attitude is present all the way to the base of society. It is the mentality of business; quarterly earnings are the focus. Everything is about being expedient today. The same can be said for the cuts to science and research, the future be damned. Someone else will have to deal with all this shit.

“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut

How To Give It Better

“It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.” ― Jonathan Swift

It should be self-evident that we shouldn’t allow our leaders to bullshit us. Yet we do allow it. Some even prefer to live in a self-delusional state, denying obvious problems. A question that should persist is “How to deliver bad news better? How to give the news so that it is received?” If received, can it be acted upon? Can we get to solving the issues and create a better future through proactive action?

Right now, the answer is that you can’t. We need new leaders who aren’t so pathetic. Leaders who act with responsibility for others over themselves. Still, even with the absolute dreck we have for leaders, we can do better. The key is to deliver more than just bad news. We need to deliver analysis and understanding along with potential solutions. The bad news should not look like an indictment of the leadership. Granted, if the leaders are awful enough (e.g., Trump), nothing will be accepted. We can’t work miracles. Still, we can do better.

The key is to deliver more than “I found this thing that sucks.” You also need to explain why this thing sucks, and how to make it stop sucking. A consistent problem is the default choice of inaction. You say that the “do nothing” solution is a problem. Solutions cost time and money. Leaders have different plans for the money (like their own pockets). Still, the basic understanding of the problems is important, along with a way out. You can’t just present a problem. The bad news alone never works. The rest needs to be included. It is harder and more effort, but in the long run, the only way out.

“Any fool can know. The point is to understand.” ― Albert Einstein

They Still Don’t Want It

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair

For more evidence of the rejection of experts, just look to the news. Bad job reports are met by the termination of the messenger. Correct and appropriate history is rejected. The Smithsonian’s correct historical content is attacked as being unpatriotic. America is great and perfect. Past crimes are to be forgotten. Like Trump, America can do no wrong. That is the mantra. Therefore, the horrors visited upon Black people in slavery are to be forgotten. The systematic ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans is overlooked. The only acceptable message is American exceptionalism.

I could see this as an anomaly if it wasn’t repeated locally at work. The same mantra, albeit dialed back, is true at work. At meetings, only good news is spoken of. When communicating with our superiors, good news is shared; bad news is buried. When problems are found and reported, the messenger is shot. We are great and successful all the time. We are world-class by definition.

For now, the bad news and well-crafted feedback are not wanted. It won’t be accepted, and those delivering it will be punished. At some time in the future, the “shit will hit the fan.” The disasters will come. The question is, how bad does it have to get before things change? I don’t know. The longer this horrible leadership persists, the worse the problems will be. People will eventually get fed up and demand different leadership. They will accept sacrifice and difficulty for a better future. It will happen. The sooner it happens, the better the outcomes and the fewer the catastrophes. For now, bewar,e calamity is coming.

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” ― George Orwell

tl;dr

Culture is something that surrounds us all the time. It’s virtually invisible, but all-consuming. Every day we navigate cultures mostly without ever knowing it. Acting in step with it and things are easy. Acting counter to it is full of friction. These cultures govern our norms of conduct and ultimately shape our lives. Workplaces have a culture both broad and local. These cultures typically are born when the place is established,be it a location or workplace. I have seen these play out in my own life most acutely at the two National Labs I worked at. Although their origins are common, the differences persist and make them very different. These cultures are overwhelmed by the culture of the Nation. Lately, this imperils the Labs with overwhelming toxicity.

“Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” ― Peter F. Drucker

Culture Envelops

All of us are swimming in cultures. There are the local and national cultures, organizational cultures, community cultures, and even family cultures. Each of these shapes our behaviors, norms, and expectations. All of these can have a positive or negative polarity. They influence our lives far more than most of us ever realize. They become so natural that they become imperceptible. The hardest thing to accept is when the culture becomes a limit on possibilities. That is a fact of life. Culture enables things; culture disallows things; culture assists you; culture gets in the way.

For me, this realization has been connected to the two places I’ve worked for most of my professional life. The places should be so similar, and yet the differences are maddening. These cultures are immersive. Both have great positive and energizing aspects. Both have terrible negative aspects. Some of the culture is timeless, and other aspects clash with modernity. The thing is that the two cultures were born together. The cool thing is you’ve all been introduced to it via a popular motion picture, Oppenheimer. Thus, the origins of the culture can be explained through things you’ve seen dramatized.

Los Alamos is the embodiment of Oppenheimer’s influence. Sandia is the embodiment of General Leslie Groves. The differences are profound, and the reasons are logical and deep. The consequences make these two places radically different in feel and basic performance. Both are also part of New Mexico and the United States. To varying degrees, these cultures clash with these organizational cultures. In recent years, the culture of the United States has been a drag on them, and to a large degree, has led to an erosion in most of what is good. Sandia has generally done better, being closer to American culture but further from New Mexico’s. Los Alamos has been savaged over the same time with a culture that is unacceptable in America today.

Now, let us delve into the origins of these cultures and what creates them.

“Biology enables, Culture forbids.” ― Yuval Noah Harari

Culture Lives Forever

“All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume.” ― Noam Chomsky

Cultures live well beyond the lives of those who establish them. Take New York City as an example. Before it was New York, it was New Amsterdam, a Dutch territory. At its founding and under Dutch rule, the city was inclusive and multicultural. It also had an aggressive business and merchandising nature. All of these characteristics persist to this day. Its transition to British rule, followed by American rule, did nothing to change any of this. The original culture of the city lives on to this very day. It will surely live on into the future.

The permanence of culture is something to notice. One of the things that culture does is provide seamless, smooth functioning of decisions that match the culture. Conversely, if decisions are counter-culture, they will encounter potentially endless resistance. Decisions that match the culture as easy and will go like second nature. Generally, management does not consider culture when coming up with its plans. They really don’t consider how to use the underlying culture to assist them or account for its resistance. The other thing that really stands in the way is a lack of willingness to be honest. Often, there are aspects of the culture that are negative or troubling. Management is often guilty of failing to recognize this.

“Shame corrodes the very part of us that believes we are capable of change.” ― Brene Brown

In the long run, culture change rarely works. Culture change happens in several key ways. The birth of a culture is usually from an epic or heroic period. If the culture goes on in the organization or place, it is because this epic struggle was a success. The other major way is in the midst of a crisis. If the entity survives the crisis, the culture that helped this survival takes over. Finally, the persistent action over and year or the action of a bigger culture will change things. The influence of the bigger culture, such as the regional or national culture, can change things. In the USA, the larger culture is evolving in terrible ways. It has been perverting most of what is good about National Lab cultures.

The most corrosive aspect of the National culture is the erosion of trust. This manifests itself as the rejection of experts and the turn away from Science and competence. The neoliberal embrace of money as the diety of worship only amplifies all this. This era is probably most defined by greed and the dominance of money over all. It has been building for 50 years. The labs swim in the toxic culture of today. Money and power are all that is good. Experts are to be suspect. The focus is short-term and myopic with self-interest ruling everything. In this environment, a culture of excellence cannot persist and becomes counter-culture.

“We seldom realize, for example that our most private thoughts and emotions are not actually our own. For we think in terms of languages and images which we did not invent, but which were given to us by our society.” ― Alan Watts

Culture Has Power

“How power is used in organizations determines whether it unites us with trust or divides us with fear” ― Hanna Hasl-Kelchner

When I moved from Los Alamos to Sandia, I experienced culture shock. While similar in structure and mission, the two labs have huge cultural differences. Los Alamos is physics; Sandia is engineering. Los Alamos is oriented toward collaboration and cooperation. Sandia is highly structured and organizationally divided. Even though the organization structures are similar. Los Alamos is a place where ideas mix. Sandia maintains stratification and division.

“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.” ― Richard P. Feynman

It is the sharing of information and communication where the cultural differences become clear. Both Labs operate under the same laws and rules governed by the same agencies. The differences in information policy go back to the origin of the Labs. Robert Oppenheimer, the founder of Los Alamos was about sharing and mixing ideas and experts. General Leslie Groves was all about strict control and enforcement of need-to-know rules. If you work on Nuclear Weapons at Los Alamos, the need-to-know rules are broad and inclusive. At Sandia, the same thing is narrow and exclusive. The impact on the Labs and their culture is profound. It is also frustrating as a scientist. My belief is that it places security concerns over productivity and discovery. In the modern information age, the differences are deeper. Information is the real power of today. Sandia puts itself at a real disadvantage because of its culture.

“Life is rarely about what happened; it’s mostly about what we think happened.” ― Chuck Klosterman

A deeper conflict is afoot. The broader American culture is slowly strangling each Lab. Los Alamos’ culture has largely been crushed and deformed by the Nation’s culture. Gone is the freedom and confidence of its origin. This was typified by the “butthead cowboy” label by the incompetent former director, Nanos. Nanos was a failure from the beginning because he clashed with the Lab culture. He was absolutely hated by the Lab. Nanos was simply the vangaurd of society’s assault on the Lab.

This lack of trust and loss of societal faith in experts has damaged Los Alamos deeply. Sandia is not immune. The same forces that destroyed the engineering culture at Boeing are present at Sandia. These forces are delivered by the Nation’s culture, where money replaces competence as the organizing principle. Corruption and greed have replaced responsibility and duty. The Nation no longer allows a company or lab organized around technical excellence to exist. They only exist if they don’t conflict with short-term profits. The excellence of these cultures has been crushed by societal incompetence. Excellence and competence cannot withstand the assault from every direction by the broken National culture.

“You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.” ― Ray Bradbury

The National culture problems are like an undiscovered cancer. It spreads unnoticed, and by the time you can see it, it might be too late. The cancer in our culture should be obvious. The problem is all of us are the problem. MAGA and Trump should be viewed as a pure malignancy. The whole movement is a rancid tumor on the national psyche. By the same token, Trump and MAGA are not the problem, but rather a mirror of a corrupted society.

All the things smothering the Labs are evident. The lying, bullshit, lack of trust, with rejection of expertise are present. The corruption and valuing of money over all else is obvious. The USA is a place where great National Labs cannot flourish. The broad devaluation of the rank-and-file person is there. Only the most powerful people matter, and the rest of us are expendable. No company, organization or Nation can thrive with these values, but these seem to be America today.

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Isaac Asimov

tl;dr

The habit of managers attacking the bearer of bad news is at the top of the news in the last week. The President “Shot the messenger” with the delivery of the latest jobs report. He didn’t like it and got rid of the bearer of the news. This does not change the reality, but it does keep work quiet. Unfortunately, this behavior is common. I have encountered it time and time again in my own work. Thus, it seems that the mantra of “shoot the messenger” is standard in the USA. One only needs to look at Boeing to see where this ends up. Eventually, reality will assert itself, and the failure to act upon the bad news will lead to disaster. It definitely did for Boeing. I foresee disasters across society from the prevalence of this deplorable practice. They will come randomly and unpredictably. There will be catastrophes.

Messenger Execution in the News

“But better to get hurt by the truth than comforted with a lie.” ― Khaled Hosseini

The recent jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics was bad news for the US economy. It was weak and showed problems in the USA’s economy. They reflected poorly on decisions made in the White House. They should have been a warning that decision makers should take heed to. Instead, the message was attacked by the President, and the head of the Bureau was fired. She was called a liar and accused of releasing statistics with political bias. This was complete bullshit. This was a lie. The President didn’t like the news and decided the correct action was to “Shoot the Messenger.”

The world and sensible Americans recoiled in horror from this act. The end result of these actions will be the loss of trust in American statistical measures of the economy. This is the latest blow to the truth in the USA. We have seen our legal system come under attack. We see science under attack. If the people in power don’t like the facts, they attack those who speak the truth. The problem we don’t see is that this behavior is already everywhere. We have a ruling class that believes that it can simply ignore facts. Ignore the truth. They can use their power and control to simply silence reality. The truth is to be ignored and the consequences be damned.

Thus, Trump is not an anomaly. Trump represents who we are. He crushes the truth. He censors. He is openly corrupt. Everything he does is done openly and in plain sight. It is accepted because it is normal. We all see it in our own lives. The bosses from the owner and management class act like this every day. I see it where I work. I’m sure you do too. If you know what’s good for you, you tow the line and accept the truth they tell you to accept. Ignore the data and the facts. This can only lead to one thing in the long run. Disaster and catastrophe. People will die. Economies will crash. This will end poorly with death and despair.

“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ― George Orwell

Shooting the Messenger in My Own Experience

“The truth is rarely pure and never simple.” ― Oscar Wilde,

I have seen this phenomenon in action at my work. I’ll be a bit oblique, but given that I’ve worked on the analysis of nuclear weapons for over 30 years, it should be taken seriously. It is a pretty common thing at both Labs I’ve worked at. It is also becoming more common and worse. Unlike the example of Boeing that I close with, the weapons aren’t tested. This should naturally lead to higher standards, but the opposite happens. Standards lower because reality’s chastening impact is denied. Reality causing a disaster is the means to a correction. You know when something is fucked up! In the current environment, the standards have become a race to the bottom. Maybe it is inevitable, but you’d think the resistance would be better given the nature of the stakes. Reality, creating a problem would be catastrophic.

I’ve written about it before in the form of its more benign cousin, toxic positivity. This is the filtering of any negative information out of the dialog. The entire public face of management is unremittingly positive. We even see this in internal communications, where problems and issues are simply not reported. Managers just pass up accomplishments and success. Problems are buried. This is most evident in our organizational meetings, where it is an endless stream of happy stories and good news. The problem is that whenever they touch on a topic where you know what’s going on, you know they’re full of shit. The natural question is whether they are full of shit with stuff you don’t know about? More than likely, they are. The message is that everything is going great, nothing to worry about, all is well. Sometimes, stronger medicine is called for, and the messenger of bad news needs to be executed.

A standard place where I see messengers getting shot is my work with verification and validation (V&V). Almost invariably, a V&V assessment is a critique. Quite often, the recipient is unhappy with it. In many cases, they fight back. In a modest example, they want the critique to be lightened and smoothed. In more extreme cases, they seek to kill the critique. This is done to remove the critique and then ignore the problems exposed by it. This is ethically suspect when you’re responsible for nuclear weapons work. Ethically suspect in almost any condition; unless maybe if you’re just modeling for a video game or movie animation, it’s okay. This sort of shoot the messenger attitude has become shockingly commonplace and routine. It is simply accepted as the standard way of doing our work. It shouldn’t be. For National Labs to accept this sort of conduct is absolutely pathetic.

To see where these pathetic standards come from, you only need to look to our leadership. I had a chance recently to engage our upper management about issues and possibilities for AI. The power of AI depends on access to data. The other computer resource that depends on data is search. Our internal search sucks. Why does it suck? The data is hidden from it. You can’t search for what you can’t see. Thus one of the most powerful tools of the last quarter century is lobodomized by lack of access to data. Data hiding is a basic cultural value that manifests itself as data silos and islands. For AI These data practices would be fatal. So, I asked about how we would avoid this for AI. The response was to attack the question. It was labeled as a “harsh” question. Eather than thank me for the insight and treat it seriously, the manager “shot the messenger.”

With management leadership like this, it’s no wonder V&V critiques are treated like shit.

That example is modest and lighthearted compared to what one previous Director of the Lab did. Before COVID, we had a vigorous discussion of the quality of the research environment at the Lab. On the order of 40 high-ranking senior staff engaged in a several-month-long discussion on the topic. Director Younger had seeded the idea in a seminar. At the end of the study an engagement the staff wrote a white paper and went to present their findings to the Director. I was part of the meeting with him. Each of us provided one example of the problems with the environment. I had a list of four possible things to mention, and chose the lightest and most obvious to present. It was the general lack of risk-taking in research and the impact of low risk on innovation. This problem is self-evident and pervasive.

“Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.” ― Mark Twain

There were 13 of us in the meeting, and we traveled around the table. Director Younger got angrier and angrier. The last comment basically asked him something important, but ultimately inflammatory. Sandia had hired 1000s of new employees in a short time. The senior staff member speaking implied (correctly) that these hires were generally substandard. She wondered what the Lab would do to mitigate this. In the wake of this, we were treated to one of the most unprofessional things I’ve ever seen. First, Younger treated us to a soliloquy about his brilliance and massive h-index. We were all basically unfit to sit in his magnificence. Then he turned to attack the staff. This included me. It was a moment of extreme professional misconduct. It was done in the presence of another executive who said and did nothing. In my 35 years at the Labs, it’s one of the worst things I’ve seen. As you might know from my requiem series, I’ve seen some heavy shit. The messenger got shot, and it was me.

Fortunately, Younger was on his way out. He was soon sacked. Good riddance to an abysmal leader.

I had forgotten my previous experience with Dr. Younger at Los Alamos. There, we had a division meeting right before a major security incident needed to be reported. Younger was the Deputy Lab Director for Weapons at this time. At the end of the meeting, Dr. Younger threatened the entire division with a closing thought, “If you know something, speak up now, remember what happened to the Rosenbergs.” He was referring to the Rosenbergs, a couple who were executed for treason. If you work on nuclear weapons, you know damn well who they are. This was a death threat. Despite this extremely unprofessional behavior, Younger was in leadership positions for the next 20 years.

With leadership like this, what hope do we have? Trump’s example is simply more of the same from an even higher position.

“These pains you feel are messengers. Listen to them.” ― Rumi

Is This Who We Are Now?

“The best way to find out if you can trust somebody is to trust them.” ― Ernest Hemingway

Yes, it is.

Trump reflects America. He is the raw image of the American ruling class. Lying, corrupt, and full of shit. The best way to really understand what Trump is guilty of is to listen to his accusations. He doesn’t possess an imagination. Thus, whatever he accuses others of is what he is guilty of. His crimes are obvious and numerous. Underneath all this is an indictment of who we are. He represents America, and the picture is disgusting. Of course, this is a polarized view, so I’ll stop. Critiques of Trump is common and label me as a “liberal” and suspect to the MAGA cult.

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” ― Aldous Huxley

It’s better to talk about a different example, the Boeing Corporation. It’s an ongoing disaster and an example of how “shoot the messenger” turns to shit. Unlike the National Labs, the Boeing products are tested. Every day, and around the World, Boeing planes fly. Recently, some of them crashed, or doors flew off midflight. They crashed because Boeing went from being an engineering company that focused on being technically competent to a money company. Engineering competence is expensive and doesn’t give shareholders the maximum value. The response was to get rid of all those pesky engineers.

I saw the hints of this back in 2006 at Los Alamos. A Boeing Engineer was visiting to find out about our turbulence research. The reason for the visit? They had shit canned almost all their turbulence people except Phillipe Spalart. Spalart’s model was deemed sufficient for future work. So, fast forward to the 737-Max and several crashes overseas, and you see the consequences of this attitude. Shitty engineering and cutting corners create a catastrophic reality. Eventually, the shit hits the fan. So while making their short-term shareholder value, Boeing destroyed their culture and legacy. They went from being the top of the heap in Engineering to a flashing red warning to society.

Now we can see the warning signs for the country as a whole. We all know it’s wrong, but shooting the messenger is now the norm. Catastrophe will surely follow as reality becomes unavoidable.

“Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche

tl;dr

Since the end of World War 2, the United States has led the World in Science and Technology. Today, that leadership is gone. The decline has been decades in the making. That decline has turned into a free fall. In my own work, I have witnessed our almost willful abdication of the throne. As I discovered, this trend was seen across many disciplines. Through a combination of arrogance, mismanagement, and outright incompetence, American supremacy decayed. All of this revolves around a loss of societal focus coupled with waning trust. COVID-19 proved to be a near-death blow to societal support. These trends now combine to see a National suicide pact for scientific superiority under Trump. The lead that had disappeared is now in retreat and absolute surrender.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’” ― Isaac Asimov

Who was leading a year ago?

China was already ahead of the USA before Trump took office. Losing the lead was decades in the making. It is well documented by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s in a recent report (https://www.aspi.org.au/report/critical-technology-tracker/). “Who is Leading in Critical Technology” shows that China leads in 37 of 44 important areas. This report confirmed signs I’d been seeing in person for years. China’s ascent was rapid and absolutely stunning to watch. In my own area, they went from laughable to world-class in a little more than a decade. When I spoke to scientists from completely different areas, the story was the same (an area of chemistry specifically).

Why did I put this section in this frame? A year ago, the scientific community in the USA was far healthier than it is today. The Trump administration has launched an all-out assault on Science. The core of American science is being slaughtered in plain sight. The top universities in the country are under assault. The key agencies for research funding are being butchered as NIH, NSF, and NASA budgets are being cut by huge amounts. Where the money is going, the science production is highly suspect. This is mostly the defense sector, which already has huge problems.

The upshot is that American science and technology were in poor shape a year ago. The past year has seen the Nation decide to mercy kill it. If we were out of the lead a year ago, we have receded even further. Worse yet, we have no plan or way back. The slow, steady decline of science has turned into a free fall. This is a massive crisis, and American National Security and economic prosperity are in peril. This development puts American lives at risk. It assures that Americans of the future will be poorer and live shorter lives. The loss of scientific supremacy was incompetent, but the current approach is criminal negligence. Rather than fix the underlying problems, the current trajectory is to dig the hole even deeper.

“America says it loves science, but it sure as hell doesn’t want to pay for it.” ― Hope Jahren

What Is Killing Science?

If I look back at my professional life, which spans nearly 40 years, the decline is obvious. It became obvious shortly after I arrived at Los Alamos in 1989. At first, Los Alamos was a godsend, and I felt magnificent. It was a huge upgrade from my University (third-tier New Mexico). Los Alamos would be an upgrade from almost any university, save a select few (Harvard, MIT, Caltech, …). That said, the signs of decline were almost immediately evident. Los Alamos had been in decline since roughly 1980, if not earlier.

As any keen observer of history, 1980 stands out with the election of Reagan and the beginning of an assault against the government. The 1970’s were more likely the origin of the decline with a host of ills from Watergate, the end of the Vietnam War, Love Canal, Three Mile Island, … We felt a collective withdrawal from faith and trust in the Nation represented by the Government. Reagan and the GOP took this into a full-on attack. The trust and confidence in science were part of the decline, as some constraints were placed on science.

Part of the damage Reagan produced came from the ascendancy of the “maximizing shareholder value” philosophy. This became central to American governance, whether in the public or private sector. The use of business principles based on this scarcity approach became how the government worked, too. Thus, the business approach driving massive inequality was applied to science and technology. The other side effect of the greedy business philosophy was the decimation of industrial science. Say goodbye to IBM and AT&T labs, and set the stage for the debacle of Boeing, seen more recently. It is a philosophy that breeds incompetence and fuck-ups. We see the rank and file worker or scientist devalued. Managers are now the valuable ones. Gone are pensions and the value of technical experts.

“The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance” ― Carl Sagan

This was reflected in Lab leadership and governance, which declined. Reagan also took on the Soviets, and this shielded Los Alamos to some degree. The Star Wars funding also blunted the damage. When the Cold War ended in 1989, marked by the Berlin Wall coming down, the real decline stepped into overdrive. Gradually, all funding support for the defense against Soviet aggression was lost. It was also far less simple than the lack of trust by the Nation also took root. Funding started to come with strings attached and micromanagement by Congress.

This micromanagement has only become worse and has become a slow strangulation of science. The management is being done by people who have little to no business telling the Labs what to do. This is complemented by a host of other dictums in safety and security. Each of these other requirements takes its own pound of flesh. None of them yields any benefit for the Lab’s mission. All of them detract. Each one is a sign of the lack of trust for the Lab. Any minor screwup or failure breeds another useless bit of bureaucracy, training, or overhead. The result is an appalling cost for the Lab’s work and a diminishing effectiveness. Meanwhile, nothing is done to push in the opposite direction.

The consequence is a decline in science. Los Alamos and the other NNSA labs are bastions of competence and accomplishment to much of the rest of science. NASA and the Defense Labs are far worse and have taken a bigger fall from the heights. Despite vast sums of money, Defense Labs are terrible. They rely on crap technology from NNSA labs and can’t produce anything better. Universities are not immune either. We see less accomplishment and increased costs everywhere. The result is American science and technology losing its lead internationally. This retreat was steady and gradual until now. This year, we handed the crown to China with a virtual abdication.

“But you see, a rich country like America can perhaps afford to be stupid.” ― Barack Obama

Who is leading now?

As noted above, China now leads, and the USA may now be behind Europe as well once the Trump Administration’s carnage takes hold. I watched this play out in my area of expertise, Shock Physics. I am an expert in solving the equations of fluid dynamics, especially with shock waves. It is a key and essential science needed in defense science and nuclear weapons. I have always paid attention to the work around the world. Europeans have always been very good. If I go back 15-20 years, the Chinese were modestly to laughably competent. Their papers weren’t very good at all. Over a decade, this changed. All of a sudden, after 2015, something changed. Their work was great. It was as good or better than anything in the West.

A bunch of us from the Western nuclear weapons labs attended a meeting in 2018. It was ECCOMAS in Glasgow, Scotland. We saw the impressive Chinese work in person. We were all in agreement about how impressive it was. We saw talk after talk of world-class work, including efforts that exceeded what was going on at our Labs. Soon after, I had the opportunity to engage our federal program manager. I felt like it was essential to point this out to them. The response was utter and complete indifference. Basically, they could not give a single fuck about the newfound Chinese lead in shock physics. So the USA is fucked.

Let’s talk a bit about just how fucked we are. There is a shock code that is used broadly across the American National security establishment. It comes from an NNSA lab, and is used by another Lab, but extensively by DoD. It is this DoD connection that illustrates vividly how fucked we are. Let me remind you that the DoD budget is now over a trillion dollars. Yet for this vast amount of money and copious funding for decades, the DoD can’t make a shock code worth a shit. This code they all use is an abomination. This abomination is better than anything they could make, which is nothing. Easy to use and lots of models, plus it runs fast on computers (although its character is threatened there being a Fortran code). Worse yet, the code was written when I was graduating from high school (class of ’82! Go Eagles!). It includes 1982 technology and none of the vast improvements since. To me, this is unacceptable, but to the USA, this is just what we do. So we are fucked.

This was not a sudden event. It was years in the making. On the one hand, you had mismanagement, poor investment, and different priorities in the USA. This was countered by focused support and radical progress in China. The USA simply stopped striving and allowed the tools to dull. We focused on big computers instead of a balance of computers with codes, methods, and mathematics. We quit doing the things that brought us the lead in the first place. The Chinese did. The USA simply surrendered, not intentionally, but by lack of care mixed with arrogance. We lost a key area of defense science that we invented. This was done by the same indifference and lack of giving fucks I encountered.

“Scientists and inventors of the USA (especially in the so-called “blue state” that voted overwhelmingly against Trump) have to think long and hard whether they want to continue research that will help their government remain the world’s superpower. All the scientists who worked in and for Germany in the 1930s lived to regret that they directly helped a sociopath like Hitler harm millions of people. Let us not repeat the same mistakes over and over again.” ― Piero Scaruffi

As other professionals have told me, this is not limited to shock physics. I talked to a distinguished Oak Ridge Chemist at a cocktail party. He told me the same story in his area. Marginal competence followed by a rapid ascent to superiority. The Australian study noted at the beginning highlights this happening in area after area. These stories are not isolated; the problems are systematic. This was the result of two forces working in concert. American decline and incompetence, together with Chinese focus, investment, and endeavor. Our decline is the product of decades of malpractice. Current policy is not fixing the problems, but adding malice and outright negligence to the problems.

What is at stake?

“Science and technology are the engines of prosperity. Of course, one is free to ignore science and technology, but only at your peril. The world does not stand still because you are reading a religious text. If you do not master the latest in science and technology, then your competitors will.” ― Michio Kaku

The stakes for the USA and the World are huge. For most Americans, the most obvious impact is national security. This feels the highest leverage for pushing back. Ever since World War 2, scientific supremacy has been essential for National defense. Scientific power with nuclear weapons replaced industrial capacity for effective war-making. As drones, robots, and AI become more central, this becomes even more compelling. We already have nuclear weapons and their science as a huge leverage point for science and technology. It is precisely the moment in history when the danger feels maximized. In this moment, American supremacy is disappearing. Future Americans will be less safe and less free.

“The progress and perfection of mathematics are linked closely with the prosperity of the state.” ― Carl Sagan

The signs are more troubling than most realize. Take our industrial base in the form of aerospace. Boeing used to be the apex of engineering in the USA. Greed and short-term focus have annihilated the company’s prowess, seeding a host of disasters. This also hints at another loss from incompetent science, our prosperity. Defense science has been the root of much of our economy today. Just take the internet, a product of a DARPA project amid the Cold War. Now it has become the central backbone of the international economy. The future “internet” and tomorrow’s economy are much more likely to come from elsewhere. Future Americans will be poorer for this. The damning fact is that this is almost entirely self-inflicted.

We are amid vast and over-the-top AI hype. Every fucking Lab is going ape shit over AI. I agree that the current moment is a big deal. The real reason the Labs are all gaga about AI is all about lots of money. Intellectually, almost no one is meeting the moment. The idea space for AI within government is close to the empty set. All this money is going to efforts to apply AI to our mission space. That said, the strategy is abysmal.

Like efforts before this in computational science, the strategy is computer-heavy and thinking-light. It has the intellectual depth of a rain puddle in my driveway. The whole moment with LLMs is grounded on an algorithm improvement. The next big step for AI will be algorithm improvement. The level of advances coming from hardware and data has a very low ceiling, but it is easy. We are taking this easy, simple path, and we will hit the wall. This is the same shallow blueprint we used to hand over computational science to the Chinese.

This will create the next AI winter unless discoveries are made. Worse yet and more dangerously, the next breakthrough won’t likely happen in the USA. It could, but probably not. China is the likely place for this. When they do, China will own the AI future. This may be their route to owning the economic and national security future, too. The incompetence of our leadership is paving the way for their dominance. They do this one stupid and short-term decision at a time. The writing is on the Wall, the future will be Chinese and not American. If we were paying attention instead of bullshitting ourselves about how great we are, this could be stopped. Instead, we are destroying science in the USA and creating an environment where we can’t win.

“For Fauci, science was a self-correcting compass, always pointed at the truth. For Trump, the truth was Play-doh, and he could twist it to fit the shape of his desire.” ― Lawrence Wright

The benefits of science have a massive impact on our health. The fruits of science allow us to live longer and better. This comes from medicines and therapies of all sorts. The backlash after the COVID pandemic is destroying the medical advances and science in the USA. This is the apex of withdrawn trust in science and the road to suffering and death for many. Future Americans will die needlessly. They already are, as Americans reject vaccines. It is pure ignorance. It is another self-inflicted wound that will harm the Nation for the foreseeable future. All of it coming from a lack of trust and some degree of irresponsible arrogance. It is combined with the amoral profit motive governing American medicine. Together, this is literally toxic to the health of Americans.

“It is my hope that this short book will remind all Americans that blind faith in authority is a feature of religion and autocracy, but not of science nor democracy.” ― Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

To go one level deeper, we can examine the roots of this. At the core of our problem is a rejection of expertise. The key aspect is the common thread of American dysfunction, lack of trust. This lack of trust has become a feature of America. This stems from a belief that everyone is out for themselves. No one is committed to anyone but themselves. Left to their own devices, people will choose greed. Self-interest is the core creed of America. One should ask what values any American would sacrifice for others or the good of the Nation. Can you have anything that is real patriotism when you don’t trust your fellow citizens? This ultimately is the root of our decline and may destroy the nation as it has destroyed science.

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” ― Aldous Huxley

tl;dr

Reading a book at the right time and place is a special gift to one’s life. I took a long weekend with a drive and listened to Simon Sinek’s “The Infinite Game.” It crystallized so much about my workplace, my country, and what is going wrong with both. Sinek writes about two mindsets: one that embraces scarcity and another that embraces abundance. He relates these to game theory. Scarcity is connected to the finite game with winners and losers. Abundance is related to the infinite game. An infinite game never ends, and everyone can win. It should come as no surprise that today’s world is dominated by the finite game’s scarcity. This mindset is the foundation of so much of what ails society. It explains a lot of terrible behavior by our “leaders.”

“To ask, “What’s best for me” is finite thinking. To ask, “What’s best for us” is infinite thinking.” ― Simon Sinek

Listening to a Great Book

On a recent long weekend, my wife and I took a road trip to Moab, Utah. It is about a six-hour drive. We decided to listen to a book on Audible, and she let me pick. I chose a book by Simon Sinek. The Infinite Game. To my surprise, my wife thought the choice was inspired. Both of us were transfixed by the narrative as the ideas poured from the “pages” of the book. We found the concepts to have immense relevance and explanatory power for today’s World. I began to see the ideas living in our politics and my work. Much of this is grounded in how powerfully the finite thinking defines everything in sight.

I was familiar with Simon Sinek from multiple sources. He has a weekly podcast, which often provides compelling content. His TED talks are great. He is a phenomenal public speaker. His messages are positive and compelling. I feel like they’re what I need to hear. I’d been introduced to the topic of this book from his podcast, which spurred me to buy the book. The trip felt like a great opportunity to finally read the whole thing. Its a good way to make the driving fly by, and hear new ideas while doing it.

As expected, Simon’s ideas in the book are inspiring. He weaves the narrative and viewpoint in both compelling and attractive ways. They crystallize a perspective that has profound explanatory power. Some themes reign over the modern World we all live in. Our time is immensely troubling, and much of what is bothersome has commonality. In listening and understanding the concepts of finite or infinite thinking, we started to see some explanations. The point in the book that hit us hardest is the description of finite thinking’s impact on ethics. He notes that finite thinking breeds ethical lapses. It destroys trust. These ethical lapses and loss of trust seem to be a common unifying thread in society.

“To ask, “What’s best for me” is finite thinking. To ask, “What’s best for us” is infinite thinking.” ― Simon Sinek

He thoughtfully points a finger at the origin of this mindset. The ideas of Milton Friedman about business have taken over. This is the idea that the only job of a business is to maximize shareholder value. It becomes greed that drives decisions. A core philosophy that has taken control of society. We live in a selfish, self-centered time. This idea has reshaped business and government, becoming a central organizing theme. The government has chosen business ideas to improve its performance (incorrectly, I believe). Sinek points out that this idea is all about finite thinking and is relentlessly short-term focused. Friedman’s ideas have also driven a host of related problems. To make everything worse, finite thinking is central in relationships, government and politics, science and technology. It is absolutely toxic. Focusing on the short term has created many long-term problems.

Before digging into some details, I should explain the meaning of finite or infinite thinking or games. Both of these ideas come from game theory, a powerful mental model useful for analyzing the World. The usual game people think of is a finite game. These are games with winners and losers. There is a limit on the stakes of a game, and typically, you have a single winner. A stalemate is possible, too (although Americans don’t deal well with ties).

“I am favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it’s possible.” ― Milton Friedman

By contrast, infinite games do not have winners or a defined end. The simplest way to think about infinite thinking is to play. Play is something that goes on for an indeterminate time, and you don’t keep score. Infinite thinking is open-ended and encourages creativity. It is also an underemphasized organizing principle for business. It is definitely a more appropriate principle for government and politics. It is also far better for most of our personal relationships. Operating a relationship as a finite game is transactional and superficial. It leads to abuse and consent violations.

“Culture = Values + Behavior” ― Simon Sinek

Infinite Games

“Working hard for something we don’t care about is called stress: Working hard for something we love is called passion.” ― Simon Sinek

The first thing to take note of with an infinite game is that is much more pleasant and inspiring. Infinite games are something that inspires passion and boundless ambition. I’ve noted that various infinite games are child’s play. Marriage is an infinite game. If you are trying to win your marriage (or relationship), it is the road to failure. Instead, a good relationship is built by playing off each other, and losing the sense of bounds on success. Sex should be an infinite game. When it’s finite (like orgasm focus), the sex is usually bad (or much worse for one of the people).

In business, the infinite game takes the role of a business with a core purpose. The business is about producing something of immense value. More importantly, that thing of value is always a little out of reach, but the process of striving for it is powerful. This pursuit naturally produces profit and success. For government functions producing good for society, this should be a natural fit. In the United States, it is the sense of pursuing a “more perfect union” that is never reached. This idea had powered the expansion of personal rights that characterized the Century after the Civil War. For institutions like those I’ve worked for, the infinite mindset is far more beneficial. It is the pursuit of principles and aims that transcend measurement. I’ve worked in National security all my life. It is work that is never done or never good enough, but can be done very well.

The benefits of infinite thinking are immense. The key is the morale and passion of the workforce. There is a clear “true North” for the entire company (organization). The workforce is energized and believes in the vision, working tirelessly toward it. The long-term approach is never sacrificed. The tactical short-term view never overwhelms and kills the company’s direction. There are clear and seamless priorities that guide decisions. Another less well-known benefit is better ethics as a result, too. Given the dearth of ethics today, that would help a lot. Bad ethics simply erode trust and produce a downward spiral. A spiral we are in the midst of.

“two ways to influence human behavior: you can manipulate it or you can inspire it.” ― Simon Sinek

Apple Computer is an archetype of this sort of thinking. At the same time, this has led to incredible products and vast profits. There were other examples, such as Eastman-Kodak, which did well while they had an infinite mindset. Then this mindset is dropped, and the company implodes. The infinite thinking guides a business through success and failure and keeps attention to the long term. Sinek calls this vision the “just cause” that centers company culture. This long-term vision can be lost at leadership changes. When finite thinking takes over, the vision is lost. The short term takes over, and the company often begins to die.

Infinite games are about pursuit of abundance with few limits on the benefits. The only limits are imposed by creativity and the laws of physics. Rather than cut of the pie, the focus is to grow the pie. The pursuit happens with defined bounds and a narrow focus, but with no ceiling.

“A Just Cause must be: For something—affirmative and optimistic Inclusive—open to all those who would like to contribute Service oriented—for the primary benefit of others Resilient—able to endure political, technological and cultural change Idealistic—big, bold and ultimately unachievable” ― Simon Sinek

Finite Games

“There is one and only one social responsibility of business–to use it resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud” ― Milton Friedman

Finite games are all about winners and losers. The core concept is one of scarcity. As noted above, the prevalence of finite thinking is all driven by the philosophy of Milton Friedman. Sinek goes on to explain all the ills that this mindset breeds. The vast inequality in society today is a direct result of it. The relentless short-term focus that defines everything today, from the stock market to government spending. It defines politics, too. We are run by the winners and losers mindset. It also powers the lack of trust in society and the questionable ethics. If the mindset were simply applied to business, this would be bad enough; it is everywhere. It runs society, and does so badly.

Classical sports competitions are the exemplar of finite games. Americans tend to have problems with games that allow draws. Basketball, football, and baseball all almost invariably have winners and losers in every game. Football has almost eliminated ties as a possibility. This means the outcome is binary. It also encourages cheating (not that soccer/futbal doesn’t have some too, FIFA is corrupt to the core). We’ve had scandals in recent years from pro and college football (the Patriots, anyone?), and the Astros from Major League Baseball. In many ways, this concept is innate in the character of the nation. We fail to recognize the limits and downsides to this organizing philosophy.

When I look at the research institutions I work at or am aware of, finite thinking is everywhere. Our programs have adopted the same short-term focus as business. Everything is revolving around the stupid idea of the quarterly report. We need to apply the business concept of earned value to research. It isn’t even a reasonable idea; it is a moronic one. This short-term focus has simply brought the research in the USA down. Worse yet, the finite thinking corrupts leaders into hollow shells.

“Infinite-minded leaders understand that ‘best’ is not a permanent state. Instead, they strive to be “better.” “Better” suggests a journey of constant improvement and makes us feel like we are being invited to contribute our talents and energies to make progress in that journey.” ― Simon Sinek

As noted above, one of the key aspects of finite games is cheating. Taken more broadly, these are encouragements of ethical lapses. In business, this looks like price controls, stock buybacks, and monopolistic practices. You see the excuse of maximizing shareholder value as the one-size-fits-all explanation. It works if the lens for observation is the stock market. Meanwhile, the company is destroying its customer base, trust, and employee morale. Sometimes, the drive to maximize the output of employees drives them to do unethical things. A stark example is Wells Fargo with fake customer accounts. This includes the management and executives of the company looking the other way multiple times. The way I see it manifest at non-profits is different, but related.

“In weak cultures, people find safety in the rules. This is why we get bureaucrats. They believe a strict adherence to the rules provides them with job security. And in the process, they do damage to the trust inside and outside the organization. In strong cultures, people find safety in relationships. Strong relationships are the foundation of high-performing teams. And all high-performing teams start with trust.” ― Simon Sinek

How Finite Thinking Creates Terrible Leaders

“When leaders are willing to prioritize trust over performance, performance almost always follows.” ― Simon Sinek

One of the key things that the differences in thinking impact is leadership. Finite thinking creates awful leaders. It can even distort people with good capacity for leadership and ruin them (I’ve seen it a lot). Infinite thinking is necessary for great leadership. By no means does it assure it, but it is necessary for greatness. With everything adhering to finite thinking these days, leadership is in crisis. This comes from multiple aspects of finite thinking: the belief of scarcity, win-lose philosophy, short-term focus, and ethics. Conversely, infinite thinking draws on abundance, win-win, long-term strategic perspective, and ethics, bringing trust. The differences should be obvious to all.

“Leadership is about integrity, honesty and accountability. All components of trust.” ― Simon Sinek

When I look at leadership today I see little integrity or honesty. There is absolute rejection of accountability. Anyone who points out a problem is treated as the enemy (i.e., shoot the messenger). I would offer the stark example of the Governor of Texas and the President when asked about a warning system after the recent floods. In both cases, they attacked the questioners as “losers” or “evil” rather than answer the obvious question. This is a rejection of accountability. The leader reflects back an almost pathological lack of trust for those they lead. It might be most accurate to say the leaders actually treat those below them with outright contempt.

This is obvious in the National political leadership, whether you look at the White House, Congress or the Courts. It isn’t everyone there, but it is the dominant behavior. The same trend appears in local politics. At my work it is typical behavior. It creates an awful environment. It creates the outcome of failing American science. I know many of the Lab leaders personally and many great people. The finite thinking crushes their potential to be great leaders (the great ones they should be).

“The best way to drive performance in an organization is to create an environment in which information can flow freely, mistakes can be highlighted and help can be offered and received.” ― Simon Sinek

It is useful to explain how this can happen. One of the major engines of dysfunction is fighting over money. This leads to backstabbing, unethical behavior, and decision-making that murders the long term. It leads to micromanagement and control. Information is hidden or withheld. If you bring them bad news, they shoot the messenger. In the wake of this is the destruction of trust. Managers act with little or no ethics but justify it by “the rules”. In this world, information is power, and it is parceled out. Doing the right thing is never the focus of decision-making. The right thing is always associated with the best money outcome.

All of this leads to an ineffective, short-term focus. It creates a toxic and ineffective organization. The one core element is a complete lack of trust. Ethics is messaged and in name only. Horrible behavior is allowed because the managers write the rules to allow their ethical lapses to be organizationally accepted. All of this stems from the application of finite thinking to managing everything. It is ruining our competence in science. It is ruining the Nation.

“Some in management positions operate as if they are in a tree of monkeys. They make sure that everyone at the top of the tree looking down sees only smiles. But all too often, those at the bottom looking up see only asses.” ― Simon Sinek

Next time, I will discuss how this short-term thinking has destroyed the advantage the USA once had in science and technology. It is clear now that China is in the lead. We gave it up through our own incompetence. Recent actions by the government are making sure the American decline is permanent and irreversible.

TL;DR

Algorithms are like recipes for data. Algorithms take different forms. Some are basic and utilitarian, while others transform science or society. In a similar vein, there are many types of recipes. Some are the basics of human nutrition. Others are transformational and provide an almost spiritual experience. New creative recipes can make dining a different experience. In both cases, technology plays a huge role in driving or being utilized. In computing, the form and details of computers are essential. They constrain the amount of data or the form it takes. In cooking, the instruments and implements of preparation open possibilities. As do the means of cooking, providing endless creativity. This analogy is powerful in explaining algorithms to the uninitiated. It is also a far deeper analogy than usually expressed.

“An algorithm is like a recipe.” ― Muhammad Waseem

An Imperfect, but Useful Analogy

The analogy of an algorithm as a recipe is common but useful. As I will discuss, the parallels of thought involving recipes for food and algorithms for data are broader than one might think initially. As recipes and dishes for cooking are commonly experienced, it works to explain algorithms to a broad audience. Let’s go through the basic elements, and then go beyond the usual narrative. I’ll briefly repeat the usual pieces of the analogy, then go a step or two deeper.

The deeper elements can touch on culture. For recipes, this is obvious as food is an expression of local culture. Algorithms are an expression of scientific culture and priorities. Their importance or lack thereof says a lot about scientific culture. Food culture is intimately related to societal and ethnic influences. It finds inspiration and influence from history. Think of how Italian food is influenced by the imported tomato today. As ingredients, spices, and flavors became available, the food changed and incorporated it. Knowledge, science and cooking techniques have transformed what we eat.

Algorithms are impacted by the scientific culture. Technology has a huge influence. The computer has influenced all of science and produced new areas of science. Information technology has become a central force in all of science. At the core of all this scientific advancement is the algorithm. The algorithm is the vehicle to take the computational engine of the computer into a useful tool for science. By the same token, the culture of science is reflected. In some areas, the algorithmic advances have largely ceased. This reflects the difficulty in funding creative work that leads to many failures between breakthroughs. A drought in algorithmic progress reflects deep issues with how the culture of science is working.

“I read recipes the same way I read science fiction. I get to the end and say to myself “well, that’s not going to happen” ― Rita Rudner

An algorithm works on a computer and operates on data. The kitchen is the realm of recipes, and they operate on ingredients. In many cases, the data needs to be prepared and transformed from its original form before the algorithm operates. Recipes do the same to ingredients. Often, these transformations are key aspects of the instructions. The order of instructions matters in both cases where parts of the solution sequence are immutable. Other parts of the instructions can be changed. They can be conducted in parallel or re-ordered to good effect. This is true of food and computing. A key part of being a chef or scientist is knowing how to make these decisions.

“In algorithms, as in life, persistence usually pays off.” ― Steven S. Skiena

Manipulating data in an array must be done in a certain order. In the same vein, slicing and dicing ingredients must proceed before adding them to the cooking dish. You do have options in the details and ordering in many cases. A key aspect of both cooking and computing is knowing when steps are equivalent. What steps can be reordered and which must be executed in lock step with the recipe? The real genius of algorithms or recipes is how data/ingredients are transformed. The magic is taking something from one form and moving to another with a completely different character. Just as a recipe is a way of drawing out and mixing flavors, an algorithm can draw out the utility and use of data. Data can be understood differently through transformations achieved by the algorithms. New purposes can emerge just as new recipes flow from old standards.

“Algorithm is arguably the single most important concept in our modern world. If we want to understand our life and our future, we should make every effort to understand what an algorithm is and how algorithms are connected to their use. An algorithm is a methodical set of steps that can be used to make calculations, resolve problems, and reach decisions. An algorithm isn’t a particular calculation, but the method followed when making the calculation. For example, if you want to calculate the average between two numbers, you can use a simple algorithm. The algorithm says: ‘First step: add the two numbers together. Second step: divide the sum by two.’ When you enter the numbers 4 and 8, you get 6. When you enter 117 and 231, you get 174.” ― Yuval Noah Harari

The Role of Technology

“I guess love’s kind of like a marshmallow in a microwave on high. After it explodes it’s still a marshmallow. but, you know, now it’s a complicated marshmallow.” ― Cath Crowley, Graffiti Moon

In both cases, technology plays a big role. For algorithms, computer technology of all sorts is essential. The nature of the computer really matters in what algorithms are efficient. A serial computer is much different than a massively parallel computer. The way a computer’s memory is organized makes a huge difference. Optimal algorithms on GPUs are much different than those on a parallel computer. The relative differences in memory levels and speed matter greatly. How do we manage the cache? These changes make an algorithm efficient or easy to program. In cooking, the computer is like the oven and stoves that produce the transformation the recipe is informing. In this way, I wonder if a GPU is the microwave oven of computers. Really fast, but sort of a route to shitty food.

“My Saturday Night. My Saturday night is like a microwave burrito. Very tough to ruin something that starts out so bad to begin with.” ― Michael Chabon

Other technologies matter for algorithms. Computing languages are ways to express algorithms. C++ or Python is vastly better than assembly language. The higher-level languages make the expression of ideas far easier and open up possibilities. Before, language algorithms were extremely limited and simple. There was a hard limit to the complexity you could tolerate in programming. The related technology is compilers, which translate the high-level language into something the computer can work with. We can see parallels to how cooking works. In many ways, programming languages are like utensils and knives used by a chef. The programmer is like the one with great skills for implementing the recipe. If you are cooking, your equipment is essential for how well a dish comes off. A mandolin can produce far better potato dishes than a knife. A ricer is great for creamy, consistent potatoes. In the same way, a high-level computer language can enable complex algorithms to be implemented.

“Controlling complexity is the essence of computer programming.” — Brian Kernighan

If we look at what a chef works with, you can see how important technology is. They use knives and spatulas to assist in the preparation of data and mix the ingredients. These tools are essential extensions of the human body or augment what we don’t easily do. The ovens and stoves are essential. Programming languages take our thoughts as instructions to be executed by the computer. In a real way, the languages are an extension of our minds. It is a way of structuring thinking into actions executed over and over. These are the recipes in the cookbooks of algorithms. The commands are the tools used to prep the data that the algorithms turn into action. These are the intellectual meals we create using computers. These have transformed society just as cooking is essential to human culture.

“An algorithm must be seen to be believed.” ― Donald Knuth,

Types of Recipes and Algorithms

“This is my invariable advice to people: Learn how to cook- try new recipes, learn from your mistakes, be fearless, and above all have fun!”― Julia Child

A useful thing to explore is the types of recipes and how they map onto algorithms. Perhaps the opposite direction is more compelling. With recipes, you have the staples, grandma’s comfort food, fast food, haute cuisine, and the cutting edge of food. We have the basic steps involving making sauces and the basic elements of recipes. These are direct analogies for algorithms of sorting, hash tables, and basic data structures. We can combine algorithms to create more complex techniques and codes for general purposes. In the same way, basic elements of recipes can be combined for something unique and special. Both algorithms and recipes have immense space for creativity and adaptability. In a special moment of creative energy, you may produce something unique and wonderful from the mixture of existing knowledge. True for either algorithms or recipes.

“Once you have mastered a technique, you barely have to look at a recipe again” ― Julia Child

Some recipes change the culinary world and become staples. The creation of the Reuben Sandwich combined pastrami beef with russian dressing, rye bread, sauerkraut and cheese. The Caesar salad has become standard worldwide. If you look at the pieces of the recipe, it is clear that the combination was inspired. It was a moment of sheer genius. Today, new recipes are being created by top chefs, ready to become popular and common in the future. In the same way, algorithms are created to change the world of computing. Google’s PageRank algorithm changed how the internet works, and its ideas power social media. Today, the LLMs creating trillions of value and visions of AI are derived from the Transformer algorithm. In each case, whether recipes or algorithms combine elements of simpler common techniques in new ways. These new ideas become the foundation of the future.

“Science is magic that works.” ― Kurt Vonnegut

TL;DR

Right now, there is a lot of discussion of AI job cuts on the horizon. Computer coders are at the top of the list. So are other white-collar jobs. It is one of the dumbest things I can imagine. The reasons are legion. First, you take the greatest proponents for AI at work and make many of them angry and scared. You make the greatest proponents of AI angry. You create Luddites. Secondly, it fails to recognize that AI is an exceptional productivity enhancement. It should make these people more valuable, not remove their jobs. Layoffs are simply scarcity at work. It is cruel and greedy. It is short-sighted in the extreme. It is looking at AI as the glass half empty. The last point gets to bullshit jobs that many people do in full or part. Instead, I think AI is a bullshit job detector. We can use it to get rid of them and find ways to make jobs more human, creative, and productive. This is a path to abundance and a better future.

“It’s hard to imagine a surer sign that one is dealing with an irrational economic system than the fact that the prospect of eliminating drudgery is considered to be a problem.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

AI as a Threat, Instead of as a Gift

Lately, the news has been full of reports that white-collar jobs are gonna be replaced by AI. I do a white-collar job. I also work with AI in research. I possess first-hand knowledge of how well AI possesses prowess in my areas of expertise. Hint, its prowess is novice and naive at best. I think I have a hell of a lot to say about this. Its ability is quite superficial. As soon as the prompt asks for anything nuanced or deep, AI falls flat on its face.

Back to the concern of vast numbers of white-collar workers. Note, that computer programmers are at the top of the “hit list.” The concern is that all of this will lead to widespread unemployment of educated and talented people. At the same time, those of us who use AI professionally can see the stupidity of this. Firing all these people would be a huge mistake. All the claims and desires to cut jobs by AI make the people saying this look like idiots. These idiots have a lot of power with a vested interest in profiting from that AI. They are mostly AI managers who have lots to gain. In all likelihood, they are just as full of shit as my managers are. My own managers are constantly bullshitting their way through reality whenever they are in public. At the Labs, the comments about fusion are at the top of the bullshit parade. A great example of stupid shit that sells to nonexperts.

“Shit jobs tend to be blue collar and pay by the hour, whereas bullshit jobs tend to be white collar and salaried.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

AI Can Do Bullshit Jobs

I think This narrative should be more clearly connected to another concept, “Bullshit Jobs.” These are jobs that add little to society and merely make work for lots of people. These jobs also exact an effort tax on every person. These jobs drive the costs and time at work. Most of my exorbitant cost at work is driven by people doing bullshit jobs (my cost is more than 3 times my salary).

On top of that they lower my productivity. What I’ve noticed is that the jobs are mostly related to a lack of trust and lots of checks on stuff. They don’t produce anything, but make sure that I do. My day is full of these things from every corner and touching every activity. I think a hallmark of these jobs is the extent to which AI could do them. I will then take this a step further; if AI can do a job perhaps that job should not be done at all. These jobs are actually beneath the humanity of the people doing them. We need to devote effort to better jobs for people.

The real question is what do we do with all these people who do these bullshit jobs. The AI elite today seem to be saying just fire everyone and reduce payroll. This is an extremely small-minded approach. It is pure greed combined with pessimism and stupidity. The far better approach would be to retool these jobs and people to be creators of value. Unleash creativity and ideas using AI to boost productivity and success. A big part of this is to take more risks and invest in far more failed starts. Allowing more failures will allow more new successes. Among these risks and failed starts are great ideas and breakthroughs. Great ideas and breakthroughs that lie fallow today. They lay fallow under the yoke of all the lack of trust fueling the bullshit jobs. If AI is truly a boon to humanity, we should see an explosion of growth, not mass unemployment.

“We have become a civilization based on work—not even “productive work” but work as an end and meaning in itself.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

Why don’t we hear a narrative of AI-driven abundance? One really has to wonder if our AI masters are really that smart if their sales pitch is “fire people”. I will just come out and say that the idea of firing swaths of coders because of AI is one of the dumbest things ever. The real answer is to write more code and do more things. The real experience of coders is that AI helps, but ultimately the expert person must be “in the loop”. AI is incapable of replacing code developers. The expert developed is absolutely essential to the process, and that AI just makes them more efficient. We need to embrace the productivity gains and grow the pie. Instead, we are ruled by small-minded greed instead of growth-minded visionaries.

“A human being unable to have a meaningful impact on the world ceases to exist.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

A Painful Lesson

To reiterate, If AI can do your job, there’s a good chance that your job is bullshit. AI is an enhancement for productivity and it should allow you to be free of much of the bullshit. What companies organization should do is illuminate work and jobs that can be done by AI. If AI can do the job entirely, the job isn’t worth doing. They should use this money to free up productivity enhance what is done, and not cut people’s employment. We’ve seen this mentality in attacks on government programs. This is the single greatest failing of Elon Musk and DOGE. They didn’t realize that what he really needed was to unleash people to do more creative and better work. It is not about getting rid of the work; it is about improving the work that is done.

“Efficiency’ has come to mean vesting more and more power to managers, supervisors, and presumed ‘efficiency experts,’ so that actual producers have almost zero autonomy.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

i’ve written about AI as producing bullshit. What if AI is a way of detecting bullshit? The real truth is when it comes to American science there’s far too little creativity and far too little freedom to do amazing work. Sometimes amazing work cannot be recognized until it is tried. It looks stupid or insane, worthy of ridicule until its genius is obvious. Or it can be not worth trying, but you don’t know until you try. A lot of bureaucratic bullshit stands in the way of progress. One reason for this is the insane amount of bullshit Jobs. The cost of them is huge with our outrageous overhead rates. In addition, they also make bullshit work for those of us trying to produce science. They get in the way of productivity in a myriad of ways with required bullshit that has no value.

What we really need to do is eliminate the bullshit and free up the mind and the creativity. We already aren’t spending enough on science and what is spent is done very unproductive. We don’t take the risks we need for breakthroughs and don’t allow the right kinds of failure. A variety of forms of bullshit jobs lead the way. Managers obsess with meaningless repetitive reviews. They micromanage and apply far too much accounting. All of this kills creativity and undermines breakthroughs. Managers should know what we do, but do it through managing. Not contrived reporting mechanisms. They should create a productive environment. There should be much more effort to determine what would be better for our lives and better productivity.

AI helps this in some focused ways. It can help to supercharge the abilities of creative and talented scientists. Just get the bullshit out of the way. I’ve found that AI is really good a churning out this bullshit. The best answer is to stop doing any bullshit that AI is capable of producing. It is a telltale sign that the work is worthless.

“Young people in Europe and North America in particular, but increasingly throughout the world, are being psychologically prepared for useless jobs, trained in how to pretend to work, and then by various means shepherded into jobs that almost nobody really believes serve any meaningful purpose.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory

If your job is so mundane so routine and so rudimentary that AI can do it, the best option is to delete it. It is a serious question to ask about a job. Most of the bullshit Jobs revolve around a lack of trust and it’s really a broader social issue. In my life, it has become a science productivity issue. If there are reports and things that AI could just as well produce, the best option is to not produce them at all because no one needs to read them. A very large portion of our reporting is never really read. If no one reads a piece of writing, should it even exist? We have a duty as a society to give people productive useful work. Every job should have that undeniable spark of humanity.

The other part of this dialog is about what kind of future we want. Do we want a scarce future where technology ravages good jobs? Whereas corporations simply think about maximizing money for the rich and care little about the employees. Do we want a future where technology like AI takes humanity away? Instead, we should want abundance and growth. Technology that enhances our humanity and reduces our drudgery. AI should be a tool to unleash our best. Any job should also require the spark of humanity to produce genuine value. It should raise our standard of living and allow more time for leisure, art and the pursuit of pleasure. It should directly lead to a better World to live in.

“Yet for some reason, we as a society have collectively decided it’s better to have millions of human beings spending years of their lives pretending to type into spreadsheets or preparing mind maps for PR meetings than freeing them to knit sweaters, play with their dogs, start a garage band, experiment with new recipes, or sit in cafés arguing about politics, and gossiping about their friends’ complex polyamorous love affairs.” ― David Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory