>Is there a word or concept (in English, or in any language) for an ostensibly straightforward and common sense solution to a real problem, whose implementation entails creating a solution which is far larger in scale than the original problem ever was?
You're thinking of the phrase "nuking a housefly", or some similar metaphors that fit the pattern "[large weapon] a [small animal]"
> The solution might seem simple, but even simple problems become difficult at scale, especially when many different people and organizations are involved.
In modeling & simulation, this is called "emergent behavior". While that may be imprecise in terms of the definition, stand by for the effects.
Doing anything at scale separates the pros from the dilettantes, e.g., me.
>Occasionally there will be a complex problem with a simple solution.
Whenever this has happened in my experience, it's come with the monkey's-paw irony that while the solution is simple, the reason why it's a solution, or at least a complete solution, is not. That almost makes it worse - people who aren't intimately familiar with the problem will see the simple solution, think the problem must have been similarly easy to understand, and then think that there must be something wrong with the solution.
This is pretty much what solution in search of a problem is. "Here, we made this thing that solves this problem someone could theoretically have." crickets
>The problems of the world are too big for me.
I would argue that the problems might be too big but they do have simple solutions. For example take microfinance. The problem this industry is attacking is lack of banking facilities for the poor. The problem is huge but the solution is simple and not too hard to scale. Similarly, don't you think that once we figure out the right model at the fundamental level, it shouldn't be hard to scale up rapidly?
>It’s the best I can do and stay sane.
I don't know how attacking bigger problems prevents you from being sane. In fact, you become saner as you get out of your comfort shell and experience what world has to offer.
> Solutions that do not require the world to change its behavior should be favored.
Is this also known as solutions that don't solve anything? To solve world-wide problems you do actually have to change something about the world, hard to do that without changing a good amount of behavior.
> but if there are no results for my problem, where should I go?
Start working on solving it yourself. Publish your findings. Be open to feedback and critique. People who are interested in working on similar problems or have something to share will find you.
Having said that, I agree that we perhaps may need a platform for something like this, since solving problems in my opinion is all about points of view and options. An open platform with simple rules that lets everyone participate in solving all kinds of problems will be a huge step for mankind even if only less than 1% of all proposed solutions make sense.
Some more thoughts on the subject.
Problems have a property of converging into patterns of similar types across different domains. I wonder what kind of solutions may emerge, if some of our unsolved problems[0] were dumbed down into simpler stories/relations (everyday metaphors) and then be openly made available for anyone to take a shot at.
But, building such a platform is going to be nearly impossible because that very desire is top-down in nature. Even if something like it does accidentally emerge and come to exist, will we act thoughtfully and utilise it like we should? [1]
> The author's metaphor here assumes a world where a massively complex system, which is basically working but has some problems, can be "fixed" via replacement by a new system designed from scratch.
> In all of human history, how many times has this ever actually worked?
I think the most recent serious attempt at this was Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. I think that states it all.
> but of humans actually doing the work and using them.
You've just identified a problem you believe needs to be solved. I wish I could say the same for myself but I can't and there it is. So for you, how to solve that problem in society. In all of: a small way, in a way that can be built on, in a large scale way. Hit on something fantastic, and I hope you do, it probably won't work right away. You'll probably have to spend some time convincing people and getting them used to the novel ideas (even if that novel idea is simply to actually follow this old idea). Spread the word? May involve repeating yourself in way that is predictable? Maybe not? What do I know!?!
> If you aren’t aligned with a human need, you’re just going to build a very powerful system to address a very small — or perhaps nonexistent — problem.
If you have to "align with a human need" and that problem is not obvious, this sounds like a solution looking for a problem.
You're thinking of the phrase "nuking a housefly", or some similar metaphors that fit the pattern "[large weapon] a [small animal]"
reply