Search

Words match in any order. "many worlds" matches the phrase exactly; -gravity excludes ideas with “gravity”.

Ideas that are…

Search Ideas


983 ideas match your query.:

Forum Rules

Veritula welcomes a wide range of discussion topics. Generally speaking, people have free speech here. Unpopular topics will not automatically get people banned. The goal of moderation is to preserve productive, truth-seeking discussion.

Behavior that is intended, or likely, to sabotage debate or prevent progress is a bannable offense. Such behavior includes, but is not limited to, harassment, brigading, rage baiting, public shaming, and persistent bad-faith argumentation or refusal to engage substantively.

Veritula takes intellectual property seriously and reserves the right to take down content that infringes on others’ intellectual property.

Veritula also reserves the right to take down obscene content such as pornography.

Serious instances of off-platform behavior that clearly would have violated these rules on-platform may result in removal.

Depending on the severity of an infraction, moderators may issue a warning, temporarily lock an account, or permanently ban the account.

Looking for loopholes in these rules, or abusing the letter to violate the spirit of these rules, is a bannable offense.

Moderation decisions are at the discretion of Veritula.

Users may appeal moderation decisions by contacting the moderators within a reasonable time after a decision. Appeals should explain why the decision was wrong. Appeals are reviewed at the moderators’ discretion. The same decision may be appealed only once.

Talks with moderators should remain respectful and constructive. Changes to these rules should be proposed before issues arise by criticizing this idea.

#4458·​Dennis HackethalOP revised 8 months ago·​Original #4364·​1 pending criticism

This was a big week for Veritula. Users can now:

  • ✍️ Post ideas to their own profile, and others’ profiles, outside of discussions. (Beta)
  • 🔄 Repost ideas.
  • 🙋‍♂️ Set a profile description under Settings. Tell others about yourself!
  • 💻 Embed discussions on third-party sites. Similar feature to Disqus and Giscus. Ideal for comments on blogs, say. See the embed code under Settings. (Early beta)
#4457·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticism

If I mute a discussion, does that stop me from getting notifications from the people I follow, when they interact with that discussion?

Yes.

As a rule of thumb, specificity beats generality. For example, if you follow someone but mute a discussion, you won’t be notified of their posts in that discussion. But if you then subscribe to a specific thread in that muted discussion, you will get their notifications for that thread.

There are exceptions. If you mute someone, you’ll never be notified of their actions.

#4453·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

Try appending /latest to the link. I still need to expose this feature somehow, but you can use that in the meantime.

Example: https://veritula.com/ideas/4434-5-minute-creativity-tl-dr-when-making-a/latest

#4439·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

Doesn’t the ‘Search’ tab offer what you want? I could rename it to ‘Posts’. Maybe ‘Ideas’.

#4438·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticismArchived

To keep things simple. This is just an MVP.

#4418·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticismArchived

Create an EmbeddedDiscussion model, separate from Discussion.

#4415·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

Option 2: an embed code is shown on your profile, with a page-url attribute you fill in. That’s the page where you place the code.

#4411·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

Option 1: when you create a discussion, an embed code is shown, which you can paste anywhere.

#4410·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

Idea: embedded discussions on third-party websites.

#4409·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticismArchived

So? How is that foundationalism?

#4403·​Dennis HackethalOP revised 8 months ago·​Original #4402·​Criticism1 pending criticism

Just because Dirk’s notion of justificationism breaks with BoI’s doesn’t mean Dirk is wrong. BoI could be wrong.

#4386·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

Dirk writes:

Foundationalism, or justificationism, is the idea that beliefs can be fully justified, proven true by some final authority beyond question.

I’m not sure foundationalism and justificationism are quite the same thing.

From BoI ch. 1 glossary:

[Justificationism is t]he misconception that knowledge can be genuine or reliable only if it is justified by some source or criterion.

Whereas foundationalism describes a prerequisite for knowledge to grow (properly). As in, needing a secure foundation or else the whole edifice falls apart.

I could see foundationalism being a flavor of justificationism, but not the same thing.

#4382·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

I have zero experience on the drug market, but I think it’s fair to assume that companies that want to get business by inhibiting people’s creativity rather than enhancing it don’t particularly care about consent.

I don’t expect honest advertising from such people. I expect trickery, not consent.

#4380·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

I agree, but this criticism chain is about predatory businesses limiting their customers’ creativity, not their own.

#4375·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

denies human creativity

No, they’re still creative, and they could overcome the addiction if they knew how, but their creativity is being severely limited.

#4373·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

According to Popper (ibid), opponents of world 3 “usually say that all these entities are, essentially, symbolic or linguistic expressions of subjective mental states”, that they’re merely, “means of communication…”

#4369·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

Rules for Participation

Veritula welcomes a wide range of discussion topics. Generally speaking, people have free speech here. Unpopular topics will not automatically get people banned. The goal of moderation is to preserve productive, truth-seeking discussion.

Behavior that is intended, or likely, to sabotage debate or prevent progress is a bannable offense. Such behavior includes, but is not limited to, harassment, brigading, rage baiting, public shaming, and persistent bad-faith argumentation or refusal to engage substantively.

Veritula takes intellectual property seriously and reserves the right to take down content that infringes on others’ intellectual property.

Veritula also reserves the right to take down obscene content such as pornography.

Serious instances of off-platform behavior that clearly would have violated these rules on-platform may result in removal.

Depending on the severity of an infraction, moderators may issue a warning, temporarily lock an account, or permanently ban the account.

Looking for loopholes in these rules, or abusing the letter to violate the spirit of these rules, is a bannable offense.

Moderation decisions are at the discretion of Veritula.

Users may appeal moderation decisions by contacting the moderators within a reasonable time after a decision. Appeals should explain why the decision was wrong. Appeals are reviewed at the moderators’ discretion. The same decision may be appealed only once.

Talks with moderators should remain respectful and constructive. Changes to these rules should be proposed before issues arise by criticizing this idea.

#4365·​Dennis HackethalOP revised 8 months ago·​Original #4364·​1 pending criticism

Rules for Participation

Veritula welcomes a wide range of discussion topics. Generally speaking, people have free speech here. Unpopular topics will not automatically get people banned. The goal of moderation is to preserve productive, truth-seeking discussion.

Behavior that is intended, or likely, to sabotage debate or prevent progress is a bannable offense. Such behavior includes, but is not limited to, harassment, brigading, rage baiting, public shaming, and persistent bad-faith argumentation or refusal to engage substantively.

Veritula takes intellectual property seriously and reserves the right to take down content that infringes on others’ intellectual property.

Veritula also reserves the right to take down obscene content such as pornography.

Serious instances of off-platform behavior that clearly would have violated these rules on-platform may result in removal.

Depending on the severity of an infraction, moderators may issue a warning, temporarily lock an account, or permanently ban the account.

Looking for loopholes in these rules, or abusing the letter to violate the spirit of these rules, is a bannable offense.

Moderation decisions are at the discretion of Veritula.

Users may appeal moderation decisions by contacting the moderators within a reasonable time after a decision. Appeals should explain why the decision was wrong. Appeals are reviewed at the moderators’ discretion. The same decision may be appealed only once.

Talks with moderators should remain respectful and constructive. Changes to these rules should be proposed before issues arise.

#4364·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​1 pending criticism

Drugs are currently illegal. Athough drug-related deaths have gone down recently, in the US, they were at an all-time high.

Drugs being illegal does not seem to deter drug use enough to warrant taking away drug users’ legal recourse, proper testing, and other such benefits of (legal) drug use.

#4360·​Dennis Hackethal revised 8 months ago·​Original #4343·​1 pending criticism

Not all cases of wanting more of something are cases of addiction.

I want to buy a second chair because I enjoy the first one, not because I cannot help but buy another.

Getting customers addicted means making it so they cannot exercise their free will (or have serious trouble doing so). They’re effectively unable to criticize ‘buy another’ as a course of action.

#4359·​Dennis Hackethal, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticism

Done.

#4345·​Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticismArchived

When an empty block is passed to render, it results in an empty tag '<>'

#4333·​Dennis HackethalOP, 9 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticismArchived

Some Reagent-like way to make things reactive using proc as first element? And then the server keeps track of which procs have been rendered, which items have changed, and re-renders that part of the template in a turbo stream?

#4332·​Dennis HackethalOP, 9 months ago·​1 pending criticism

Redirects result in two additional requests, the first of which is a turbo-stream request that renders nothing, thus (presumably) prompting the browser to make another request for the same resource.

This? https://stackoverflow.com/a/74071278

#4330·​Dennis HackethalOP, 9 months ago·​Criticism1 pending criticismArchived