Institutional Antifragility Grading
dyokomizo opened this issue · 1 comments
“Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution.”
— Clay Shirky
We should grade institutions based on their vulnerability against fraud, corruption, etc.. We have independent grading for financial instruments and currencies, there's no reason against a Consumer Reports but for Institutions.
Independent security experts assess the attack surface, using standard threat modelling analysis.
e.g. peer review gets a C, but JAMA's is a bit better so it's a B-.
All sources of information are good candidates for this process.
Specific issues and vulnerabilities are pointed out and discussed.
Scale includes robustness, resilience, and antifragility.
Many of the messages presented in respectable scientific publications are, in fact, based on various forms of rumors. Some of these rumors appear so frequently, and in such complex, colorful, and entertaining ways that we can think of them as academic urban legends. The explanation for this phenomenon is usually that authors have lazily, sloppily, or fraudulently employed sources, and peer reviewers and editors have not discovered these weaknesses in the manuscripts during evaluation.