Activity Feed

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2886.

I am currently unable to zoom out to the full width when accessing Veritula on mobile.

#2886·Benjamin Davies, 8 days ago

This change is on purpose. The zoom feature was buggy. After zooming out far enough, the navbar and footer got cut off on the right. So I replaced it with proper scrolling.

Would you say zooming was indispensable or just nice to have?

  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #2816. The revision addresses idea #2865.

The user could publish it as a separate independent idea, including a link to the idea they want to relate/refer to.

This is how relating discussions works currently. For instance, if I start a discussion on Bitcoin, I might want to connect it to the existing discussion on Zcash. At present, the only way to achieve this is by adding a link to the Zcash discussion within my new Bitcoin discussion.

I suspect you would agree with me that this approach to how discussions interact isn’t really an issue. I also think it wouldn’t be an issue for independently published ideas, for the same reasons.

Note: This has lead me to the idea that links within Veritula could be bidirectional. Each idea could have an option to display all other ideas that refer to it. I will submit this as a top-level idea in this thread.

The user could publish it as a separate independent idea, including a link to the idea they want to relate/refer to.

This is how relating discussions works currently. For instance, if I start a discussion on Bitcoin, I might want to connect it to the existing discussion on Zcash. At present, the only way to achieve this is by adding a link to the Zcash discussion within my new Bitcoin discussion.

I suspect you would agree with me that this approach to how discussions interact isn’t really an issue. I also think it wouldn’t be an issue for independently published ideas, for the same reasons.

Note: This has led me to the idea that links within Veritula could be bidirectional. Each idea could have an option to display all other ideas that refer to it. I will submit this as a top-level idea in this thread.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2738.

Idea: ‘Conjecture Arena’, ‘CA’

#2738·Benjamin Davies revised 12 days ago

#2810 applies to this idea as well.

  Dennis Hackethal archived idea #2305 along with any revisions.
  Dennis Hackethal archived idea #1812 along with any revisions.
  Dennis Hackethal addressed criticism #1812.

When you revise an idea to address a criticism, its author should get a notification so they get a chance to verify that the revision really does address the criticism.

#1812·Dennis HackethalOP, 2 months ago

The new subscription system takes care of this.

  Dennis Hackethal archived idea #451 along with any revisions.
  Dennis Hackethal revised idea #2851.

Remove tracking ID


Interview published today, with one of the founders of Wikipedia:
https://youtu.be/8-0vUZ0hTK4?si=Szd_nS4UvCy9Mifi

He argues, like I do, that Wikipedia should allow multiple competing articles on each topic.

I partly agree with him on other problems he identifies, but unfortunately he doesn’t come at it from a Popperian angle.

Interview published today, with one of the founders of Wikipedia:
https://youtu.be/8-0vUZ0hTK4

He argues, like I do, that Wikipedia should allow multiple competing articles on each topic.

I partly agree with him on other problems he identifies, but unfortunately he doesn’t come at it from a Popperian angle.

  Dennis Hackethal archived idea #2853 along with any revisions.
  Dennis Hackethal commented on idea #2899.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality of my self-reflection.

#2899·Benjamin Davies revised 7 days ago

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted idea #2901.

A recurring theme in the video is people thinking that reason is the domain of logical, explicit thought, whereas your emotions, gut, etc live in a different domain.

So to them, the question “Can you live your life 100% guided by reason?” means ‘Can you suppress your emotions, gut, etc your entire life?’

They’re right to answer ‘no’.
They’re wrong to think that’s what reason is about. See #2281, #2844.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality of my self-reflection.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

#2897·Benjamin Davies, 7 days ago

I already have a loose journalling habit, but it is completely free of schedule, structure or method.

  Benjamin Davies submitted idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2829. The revision addresses ideas #2859, #2866, #2868, #2869, and #2870.

revising to account for criticisms


The Open Society

This is the political philosophy of Critical Rationalism, detailed by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies. An open society is one in which each individual is largely enabled to make their own personal decisions, as opposed to a tribal or collectivist society. It replaces the justificationist political question, "Who should rule?", with the fallibilist question: "How can we structure our institutions so that we can remove bad rulers and bad policies without violence?". In this view, democracy is not "rule by the people" (an essentialist definition) but is valued as the only known institutional mechanism for error-correction and leadership change without bloodshed.

The Open Society

The concept of an 'Open Society' is central to the political philosophy of Critical Rationalism, detailed by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies. An open society is characterized by individualism, where personal choice and responsibility are paramount, in contrast to a closed society (e.g., tribal or collectivist) which demands the subordination of the individual to the group. It replaces the justificationist political question, "Who should rule?", with the fallibilist question: "How can we structure our institutions so that we can remove bad rulers and bad policies without violence?". In this view, democracy is not "rule by the people" (an essentialist definition) but is valued as the only known institutional mechanism for error-correction and leadership change without bloodshed.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2892.

The purpose of the reaction would be to record a kind of agreement or acknowledgment.
That way, Veritula could show ‘pending’ criticisms to users, say – ‘pending’ in the sense that they haven’t responded to those criticisms. So in addition to revising or counter-criticizing, they get a chance to accept a criticism without it remaining in a ‘pending’ state.

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

#2892·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago

This is a good idea.

I often receive criticisms that I have no counter-criticisms for, and it would be nice to be able to acknowledge those, both as a way to display gratitude, and as a way to indicate that I think something is tentatively settled.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2889.

There are a few reasons people might send criticisms instead of revising an idea themselves:

  1. You get a chance to disagree.
  2. Submitting a criticism is easier.
  3. A criticism is a written record explaining why a revision is necessary.

Because of the third reason, you may see people post a criticism and then immediately revise your idea to address it.

Maybe I’m wrong but I’m sensing a bit of frustration between the lines. Please note that Veritula pursues a higher standard of error correction than other platforms. Some criticisms may be unexpected; discussions could go in a direction you did not anticipate. You may receive criticisms that would be deemed nitpicky on other platforms, but they’re not meant to be. They may go beyond what’s strictly socially acceptable. I intend criticism to be a gift to you. For ‘small’ criticisms, it’s usually best to revise accordingly and not counter-criticize.

Your idea reads more like a question than a criticism. But since I’ve (hopefully) answered it, I’m marking this response a criticism to neutralize it.

#2889·Dennis HackethalOP, 7 days ago

Thank you for clarifying this. The idea of submitting a criticism and also immediately revising makes sense.

The criticisms you shared today (that inspired me to post #2884) are valid. This question came out of confusion as to how Veritula is intended to be used, rather than frustration directed at you.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2159.

How about emoji reactions?

#2159·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

The purpose of the reaction would be to record a kind of agreement or acknowledgment.
That way, Veritula could show ‘pending’ criticisms to users, say – ‘pending’ in the sense that they haven’t responded to those criticisms. So in addition to revising or counter-criticizing, they get a chance to accept a criticism without it remaining in a ‘pending’ state.

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2823. The revision addresses idea #2858.

Political Holism

Synonymous with large-scale social engineering, this is the political program that follows from Historicism. It is the attempt to remodel an entire society from a central blueprint, based on a historicist prophecy of an "ideal" state. Popper argued this program is both violent and irrational. It is violent because it requires the suppression of all dissent to enact the central plan, and it is irrational because when an entire system is changed at once, it becomes impossible to trace the consequences of any single action, making it impossible to learn from mistakes.

Political Holism

Synonymous with large-scale social engineering, this is the political program that follows from Historicism. It is the attempt to remodel an entire society from a central blueprint, based on a historicist prophecy of an "ideal" state. Popper argued this program is both violent and irrational. It is violent because it requires the suppression of all dissent to enact the central plan, and it is irrational because when an entire system is changed at once, it becomes impossible to trace the consequences of any single action, making it impossible to learn from mistakes.

  Dennis Hackethal addressed criticism #2884.

Since users are able to revise other users’ ideas, why is it standard practice on Veritula to submit trivial improvements to ideas (such as correction of typos, poor grammar and redundancies) as criticisms, rather than directly revising the idea itself? Example: #2865

Perhaps I have misunderstood the intention of enabling users to revise other people’s ideas.

#2884·Benjamin Davies, 8 days ago

There are a few reasons people might send criticisms instead of revising an idea themselves:

  1. You get a chance to disagree.
  2. Submitting a criticism is easier.
  3. A criticism is a written record explaining why a revision is necessary.

Because of the third reason, you may see people post a criticism and then immediately revise your idea to address it.

Maybe I’m wrong but I’m sensing a bit of frustration between the lines. Please note that Veritula pursues a higher standard of error correction than other platforms. Some criticisms may be unexpected; discussions could go in a direction you did not anticipate. You may receive criticisms that would be deemed nitpicky on other platforms, but they’re not meant to be. They may go beyond what’s strictly socially acceptable. I intend criticism to be a gift to you. For ‘small’ criticisms, it’s usually best to revise accordingly and not counter-criticize.

Your idea reads more like a question than a criticism. But since I’ve (hopefully) answered it, I’m marking this response a criticism to neutralize it.

  Dennis Hackethal addressed criticism #2887.

This is no longer working for me.

#2887·Benjamin Davies, 8 days ago

Sorry, I was debugging something and temporarily disabled this feature. Should be back up.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2771.

Yes, see here: https://veritula.com/discussions/veritula-meta
Give it a shot.

#2771·Dennis HackethalOP, 11 days ago

This is no longer working for me.

  Benjamin Davies submitted criticism #2886.

I am currently unable to zoom out to the full width when accessing Veritula on mobile.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2860.

You forgot to count comments on older versions of ideas.

#2860·Dennis HackethalOP, 8 days ago

Ah I see.

  Benjamin Davies submitted criticism #2884.

Since users are able to revise other users’ ideas, why is it standard practice on Veritula to submit trivial improvements to ideas (such as correction of typos, poor grammar and redundancies) as criticisms, rather than directly revising the idea itself? Example: #2865

Perhaps I have misunderstood the intention of enabling users to revise other people’s ideas.