The author identifies problems with a system measuring targets, but then all the proposals are about increasing the power and control of the system.
Perhaps the answer—as hippy sounding as it is—is to reduce the control of the system outright. Instead of adding more measures, more controls, which are susceptible to the prejudices of control, we let the system fall where it may.
This, to me, is a classic post of an academic understanding the failures of a system (and people like themselves in control of said system) but then not allowing the mitigation mechanisms of alternate systems to take its place.
This is one of the reasons I come to HN: to view the prime instigators of big-M Modern failure and their inability to recognize their contributions to that problem.
Loosening of control is exactly the answer, but the world pathology is currently that money/power/control are all unalloyed virtues to be pursued at any cost, so we'll have to wait for a global implosion before any of the Certified Geniuses on this site, or anywhere else, consider an alternative approach.
For an example of this, I recall reading a proposal that acts of Congress be strictly limited to be at most (say) 5 pages in length. This would be a natural form of regularization of the legislative power.
Perhaps the answer—as hippy sounding as it is—is to reduce the control of the system outright. Instead of adding more measures, more controls, which are susceptible to the prejudices of control, we let the system fall where it may.
This, to me, is a classic post of an academic understanding the failures of a system (and people like themselves in control of said system) but then not allowing the mitigation mechanisms of alternate systems to take its place.
This is one of the reasons I come to HN: to view the prime instigators of big-M Modern failure and their inability to recognize their contributions to that problem.