# Dominic Cummings: "we’re hiring data scientists, project managers, policy experts, assorted weirdos"

Dominic Cummings (discussed previously on LW, most recently [here](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XJ2ivxdgrYxnFLxNG/link-high-performance-government-dominic-cummings)) is a Senior Advisor to the new UK PM, Boris Johnson. He also seems to be essentially [a rationalist](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XJ2ivxdgrYxnFLxNG/link-high-performance-government-dominic-cummings#Hi2GRA6J6ZZvWmSDB) (at least in terms of what ideas he's paying attention to).

He has posted today that his team is hiring "data scientists, project managers, policy experts, assorted weirdos". Perhaps some LW readers should apply.

Extensive quotes below:

* * *

_‘This is possibly the single largest design flaw contributing to the bad Nash equilibrium in which … many governments are stuck. Every individual high-functioning competent person knows they can’t make much difference by being one more face in that crowd.’ Eliezer Yudkowsky, AI expert, LessWrong etc._

\[...\]

Now there is a confluence of: a) Brexit requires many large changes in policy and in the structure of decision-making, b) some people in government are prepared to take risks to change things a lot, and c) a new government with a significant majority and little need to worry about short-term unpopularity while trying to make rapid progress with long-term problems.

There is a huge amount of low hanging fruit — trillion dollar bills lying on the street — in the intersection of:

*   the selection, education and training of people for high performance
*   the frontiers of the science of prediction
*   data science, AI and cognitive technologies (e.g [Seeing Rooms, ‘authoring tools designed for arguing from evidence’,](https://dominiccummings.com/2019/06/26/on-the-referendum-33-high-performance-government-cognitive-technologies-michael-nielsen-bret-victor-seeing-rooms/) Tetlock/IARPA prediction tournaments that could easily be extended to consider ‘clusters’ of issues around themes like Brexit to improve policy and project management)
*   communication (e.g Cialdini)
*   decision-making institutions at the apex of government.

**We want to hire an unusual set of people with different skills and backgrounds to work in Downing Street with the best officials, some as spads and perhaps some as officials. If you are already an official and you read this blog and think you fit one of these categories, get in touch.**

The categories are roughly:

*   Data scientists and software developers
*   Economists
*   Policy experts
*   Project managers
*   Communication experts
*   Junior researchers one of whom will also be my personal assistant
*   Weirdos and misfits with odd skills

\[...\]

_A. Unusual mathematicians, physicists, computer scientists, data scientists_

You must have exceptional academic qualifications from one of the world’s best universities or have done something that demonstrates equivalent (or greater) talents and skills. You do not need a PhD — as Alan Kay said, we are also interested in graduate students as ‘world-class researchers who don’t have PhDs yet’.

\[...\]

A few examples of papers that you will be considering:

*   \[...\]
*   The papers on computational rationality below.
*   [The work of _Judea Pearl_](https://dominiccummings.com/2018/05/21/technology-the-state-of-the-art-in-ai-causality-and-hypotheticals/), the leading scholar of causation who has transformed the field. 

\[...\]

_B. Unusual software developers_

We are looking for great software developers who would love to work on these ideas, build tools and work with some great people. You should also look at some of Victor’s technical talks on programming languages and the history of computing.

You will be working with data scientists, designers and others.

_C. Unusual economists_

We are looking to hire some recent graduates in economics. You should a) have an outstanding record at a great university, b) understand conventional economic theories, c) be interested in arguments on the edge of the field — for example, work by physicists on ‘agent-based models’ or by the hedge fund Bridgewater on the failures/limitations of conventional macro theories/prediction, and d) have very strong maths and be interested in working with mathematicians, physicists, and computer scientists.

\[...\]

The sort of conversation you might have is discussing these two papers in _Science (2015)_: [_Computational rationality: A converging paradigm for intelligence in brains, minds, and machines_, Gershman et al](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.720.2764&rep=rep1&type=pdf) and [_Economic reasoning and artificial intelligence_, Parkes & Wellman](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6245/267.short). 

You will see in these papers an intersection of:

*   von Neumann’s foundation of game theory and ‘expected utility’,
*   mainstream economic theories,
*   modern theories about auctions,
*   theoretical computer science (including problems like the complexity of probabilistic inference in Bayesian networks, which is in the NP–hard complexity class),
*   ideas on ‘computational rationality’ and meta-reasoning from AI, cognitive science and so on.

If these sort of things are interesting, then you will find this project interesting.

It’s a bonus if you can code but it isn’t necessary.

_D. Great project managers._

If you think you are one of the a small group of people in the world who are truly GREAT at _project management_, then we want to talk to you.

\[...\]

It is extremely interesting that the lessons of Manhattan (1940s), ICBMs (1950s) and Apollo (1960s) remain absolutely cutting edge because it is so hard to apply them and almost nobody has managed to do it. The Pentagon systematically de-programmed itself from more effective approaches to less effective approaches from the mid-1960s, in the name of ‘efficiency’. Is this just another way of saying that people like General Groves and George Mueller are rarer than Fields Medallists?

\[...\]

_E. Junior researchers_

In many aspects of government, as in the tech world and investing, brains and temperament smash experience and seniority out of the park.

We want to hire some VERY clever young people either straight out of university or recently out with with extreme curiosity and capacity for hard work.

\[...\]

_F. Communications_

In SW1 communication is generally treated as almost synonymous with ‘talking to the lobby’. This is partly why so much punditry is ‘narrative from noise’.

With no election for years and huge changes in the digital world, there is a chance and a need to do things very differently.

\[...\]

_G. Policy experts_

One of the problems with the civil service is the way in which people are shuffled such that they either do not acquire expertise or they are moved out of areas they really know to do something else. One Friday, X is in charge of special needs education, the next week X is in charge of budgets.

\[...\]

If you want to work in the policy unit or a department and you really know your subject so that you could confidently argue about it with world-class experts, get in touch.

\[...\]

_G. Super-talented weirdos_

People in SW1 talk a lot about ‘diversity’ but they rarely mean ‘true cognitive diversity’. They are usually babbling about ‘gender identity diversity blah blah’. What SW1 needs is not more drivel about ‘identity’ and ‘diversity’ from Oxbridge humanities graduates but more _genuine cognitive diversity_.

We need some true wild cards, artists, people who never went to university and fought their way out of an appalling hell hole, weirdos from William Gibson novels like that girl hired by Bigend as a brand ‘diviner’ who feels sick at the sight of Tommy Hilfiger or that Chinese-Cuban free runner from a crime family hired by the KGB. If you want to figure out what characters around Putin might do, or how international criminal gangs might exploit holes in our border security, you don’t want more Oxbridge English graduates who chat about Lacan at dinner parties with TV producers and spread fake news about fake news.

By definition I don’t really know what I’m looking for but I want people around No10 to be on the lookout for such people.

We need to figure out how to use such people better without asking them to conform to the horrors of ‘Human Resources’ (which also obviously need a bonfire).

*

\[...\]

As Paul Graham and Peter Thiel say, most ideas that seem bad are bad but _great_ ideas also seem at first like bad ideas — otherwise someone would have already done them. Incentives and culture push people in normal government systems away from encouraging ‘ideas that seem bad’. Part of the point of a small, odd No10 team is to find and exploit, without worrying about media noise, what Andy Grove called ‘very high leverage ideas’ and these will almost inevitably seem bad to most.

I will post some random things over the next few weeks and see what bounces back — it is all upside, there’s no downside if you don’t mind a bit of noise and it’s a fast cheap way to find good ideas…

* * *

H/T [ioannes_shade](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XJ2ivxdgrYxnFLxNG/link-high-performance-government-dominic-cummings#5dpsBrrciWAhsS3Kx)