Thermodynamic bureaucracy: Let’s return to this topic —one that is very close to our hearts: Sgaragac and thermodynamic bureaucracy — given that recent sociopolitical developments are accelerating the dissolution of the system that gave rise to them. We are witnessing a rise in the temperature of society caused by increasing inefficiencies.
In a mechanical system, inefficiencies are always present: proper design, first, and maintenance, second, allow the system to remain within its range of correct operation.
Modifying the system requires an investment: improving one or more parameters will yield some return on investment (otherwise, it is a deterioration). This could involve researching a new surface treatment for the material used, which would allow for a smaller oil pump and consequently improve the engine’s mechanical efficiency. The increase in performance would naturally lead to an expectation that customer orders will increase, thereby paying off that investment.
The laws and rules of a society function in a similar way: if those laws are not designed to improve the efficiency of the social system, friction will increase, more oil is consumed, the pump runs dry, and the temperature rises until the engine seizes. The engine has thus reached the thermodynamic state in which all the heat generated by combustion is used solely to overcome friction without producing useful work (where useful work is going from A to B).
The rise in temperature is the warning sign of the system’s imminent collapse.
When a society must establish oversight agencies to enforce labor laws, and when agencies are needed to monitor the work of other regulators, efficiency declines and social tensions rise. We’ll explain why with an example.
Country X wants to build a nuclear power plant because it is the system that offers the highest ROI (Return on Investment). Over the years, Country X invests in nuclear research and trains physicists, engineers, and technical staff to begin construction. Let’s assume that the plant, once completed, begins producing energy twenty-five years after the start of staff training. The knowledge acquired during that time is used to begin construction of other plants that are better than the first—that is, with lower costs per MWh and/or greater efficiency; better performance must be the benchmark. Lower-cost energy production stimulates the rest of the industry, which will benefit by producing domestic goods that can be exported more easily, thereby fostering further prosperity.
If the goal of medicine is to improve the patient’s condition, that of the economy is to improve the lives of the people of country X (and that of the state is to facilitate economic enterprise).
Now, let’s say that, for reasons that are more or less logical, regulatory bodies are established to supervise the work of power plant staff; those regulatory agencies have a social cost that will affect the plant’s ROI. It will take longer to break even on the investments, and the cost will be borne by the industry, which will purchase the energy at a slightly higher price. However, we can say that if the oversight agency reduces the likelihood of damage or failures, the return on investment is also reflected in the balance sheet. The problem is that, if something does not happen, it is not necessarily because it was prevented by the oversight agency. We can still say that given the risk associated with a certain activity, the control may be more or less justifiable; however, this does not change the fact that the cost must be included in the overall budget.
The moment control agencies acquire power (think of ISO 9001 standards) and begin to take on a life of their own, instead of representing an investment in terms of “avoided failures” or “prevented accidents,” they become a system that devours resources. But the power has already been ceded —Safety First— and to reverse this, we must dismantle and break through that agency, reclaiming responsibility.
Today’s society is not only increasing the number of laws and regulations in every area: from Euro 7 to ISO 9001 to the new italian security decree (consider the British LOLER https://www.hse.gov.uk/work-equipment-machinery/loler.htm regulations, which lead to the absurd situation where recertifying mechanical lifting equipment costs more than the parts themselves, so companies simply discard those components to buy them back certified; certification lasts from 6 months to 1 year: thermodynamic bureaucracy: the paperwork costs more than the part itself, and it is cheaper to throw the part away and buy a new one than to redo the paperwork) but the methodology for applying the rules is also changing. Years ago, people knew the rules existed… but they’d sweep their dirty laundry under the rug during inspections, and the world kept turning anyway. Today, implementation has become more algorithmic, so if the piece of paper is missing, everything literally grinds to a halt. When it comes to paperwork, of course, we make no distinction between the physical document and a digital one, which, incidentally, is generally even slower to be processed, received, and/or signed.
Society is governed by grey zones; the more the mindset becomes algorithmic, the less efficient society will be, and it will literally grind to a halt over trivialities. There is a shift in importance taking place from the actual task or component to the digitized and unreachable process.
(Signing a piece of paper is infinitely more practical than a PDF document I haven’t received yet and that I have to digitally sign and send via certified email.) Algorithmic implementation is like the regulatory body mentioned above; it comes at a social cost: there’s no such thing as a free lunch.
What is the ROI of restricted traffic zones (ZTL)? Of the EIC (Elctronic Identity Card)? Of SPID (Sistema Pubblico di Identità Digitale, because Italy likes to have it double…)? Of electronic prescriptions?
What is the cost of implementing mandatory POS systems for all businesses? Paying under the table is an efficient way to move money quickly and distribute wealth by providing value exactly for the service rendered. Why should someone who gives math tutoring pay taxes on their earnings? How exactly does the state fit into the equation? I pay the taxi driver in cash and he goes to fill up on gas… what’s the difference if I put the gas in the car myself or if I give the money to the taxi driver and he fills up without an invoice? There are already enough excise taxes on gas, aren’t there? Aren’t those enough? Should we also add taxes on the transaction from me to the taxi driver? GoFuckOff
If you add layers of control (PagoPA(=PayPublicAgency) and similar systems), you’re adding complexity to the system without creating any added value (because the government still has to maintain those systems: software, servers, receipts of receipts). What’s the return on investment for the notary? A revolutionary thought: what benefits does the Chamber of Commerce offer me? Does it give me visibility? Does it promote for me?
The true added value lies in transforming one object into another through the use of energy and time. If a great deal of energy and time is required to achieve the same end result, the cost of the transformed object will be higher. All thermodynamic inefficiencies contribute to raising the final cost.
The purpose of a nuclear power plant is to provide low-cost energy. If society is unable to create the conditions for low-cost energy to be provided and does not facilitate rapid action, that society is doomed to increase its temperature due to thermodynamic inefficiencies.
The more grey zones there are, the faster and more efficient actions will be. Over-regulation of everything reduces grey zones. The algorithmic implementation of rules slows down processes even further because the nature of things is not 100% deterministically predictable. If people are indoctrinated to slavishly follow protocols, they will be more mentally rigid and will not exploit grey areas to solve problems efficiently. Everything will be slow, everything will be cumbersome, and nothing will ever be “on schedule” because those who create the rules —or change them— do so faster than reality evolves. Costs will rise, as will delays, and managers will shout: STOP THE DELAY!
Success