*ahem* Pulling back a bit…
The cost of doing “one thing” is extraordinarily high, and the cost of automating it is even higher, mostly because that automation does not scale and the implementation is typically not reusable in any capacity
(For the more academically inclined, automating regulatory obligations and the supporting infrastructure is typically not reusable for the same reason that mathematical proofs don’t compose
It scales poorly for the same reason. Implementing proofs is tedious, nuanced, laborious, and fragile)
Which is a major reason why regulated companies don’t get nice things
Highly resilient systems are complex by nature, resist categorification, and are illegible. Operating them requires dynamic management systems whose complexity exceeds the system they manage
But regulation requires legibility!
As a consequence, the more regulated a property is, the harder it is to achieve. Security? Resilience? Reliability? Performance? Trustworthiness?
Those are properties. So, essentially by definition, regulating them makes them harder to achieve. It’s an inextricable paradox of legibility
As an aside: This is not an anti regulation thread. But you need to understand the price you pay when you build a society that requires internationally trusted institutions for *every* supply chain
Regardless, resolving the “having a property” vs “proving you have it” regulation/legibility paradox is a major unsolved problem in resilience engineering and software engineering
I would argue it’s one of the most important unsolved problems of our era, and is woefully underinvested in
Hopefully, the above helps explain why regulated industries move so slowly. It’s also an incredible testament to the power of automation: despite the exorbitant cost, it’s still worth it
But it’s a very bitter price to pay! I hate paying it, and I don’t think the cost is inevitable or unavoidable
