Costs of optimization (was: Re: Information security, recycling and irony)

[Fred]

On Friday 03 February 2006 23:54, bmcculley at rcn.com wrote:
> Fred wrote:
> >Just a little thing like using *real* recycled paper, not
> >reused paper, with perhaps their logo printed on it as an
> >added touch, would not cost all that much more AND would
> >avoid snafus such as this.
>
> "would not cost all that much more" is the issue.  Our free
> market economy has gotten so efficient that *any* additional
> cost is fatal, and *any* cost-cutting is vital.  So the
> benefit of re-using waste paper as wrappers is seen as compelling.
>
> UNTIL...
>
> the cost of compromising confidential data kicks in.  That's
> an unintended and unforeseen consequence though, so the bean
> counters haven't figured it into their models.  What is
> needed, and not yet considered, is some way to include the
> costs when optimizations break.  Usually it seems what happens
> is that optimized performance reduces costs fractionally, but
> failures incur costs increased by orders of magnitude over the
> costs of operating a simpler but more robust system.  But
> that's just an intuitive appraisal, has anyone done any formal
> research into these issues?

There's a Complexity group in the local area that has probably addressed this 
and similar concerns.

New England Complex Systems Institute

http://necsi.org/discuss/discuss.html

-Fred