Mayfield's paradox
Mayfield's Paradox states that to keep everyone out of an information system requires an infinite amount of money, and to get everyone onto an information system also requires infinite money, while costs between these extremes are relatively low. The paradox is depicted as a U-curve, where the cost of a system is on the vertical axis, and the percentage of humanity that can access the system is on the horizontal axis
Metadata
- Slug: 00258-mayfield-s-paradox
- Type: PARADOX
- Tags: paradox
- Sources: 1
Axioms
- Assume the rules of the domain apply uniformly.
- Assume the observer’s criteria remain fixed.
- Assume classification boundaries stay consistent.
- Assume the model describes the real case.
- Assume repeated steps do not change the outcome.
- Assume no hidden variables are introduced midstream.
Contradictions
- Two reasonable lines of inference yield opposite conclusions
- A global rule conflicts with a local judgment
- A stable resolution appears to violate a starting premise
- Changing the framing reverses the outcome
- Intuition and formalism diverge at the same step
Prompts
- Which assumption is doing the most hidden work?
- What changes if you relax the smallest constraint?
- Does the paradox dissolve or relocate when reframed?
- What is conserved, and what is sacrificed?
Notes
Sources
Overview
Mayfield’s Paradox states that to keep everyone out of an information system requires an infinite amount of money, and to get everyone onto an information system also requires infinite money, while costs between these extremes are relatively low. The paradox is depicted as a U-curve, where the cost of a system is on the vertical axis, and the percentage of humanity that can access the system is on the horizontal axis
Tension
- Two reasonable lines of inference yield opposite conclusions.
- A global rule conflicts with a local judgment.
- A stable resolution appears to violate a starting premise.
- Changing the framing reverses the outcome.
- Intuition and formalism diverge at the same step.
Why It Matters
This entry tests how a stable rule-set can yield unstable conclusions under certain assumptions.
Prompts
- Which assumption is doing the most hidden work?
- What changes if you relax the smallest constraint?
- Does the paradox dissolve or relocate when reframed?
- What is conserved, and what is sacrificed?