Search Ideas
2416 ideas match your query.:
Emoji reactions (#2159) are implemented as of ea482fb.
Wiener says the dollar can go up or down in value (usually down; prices usually rise).
He suggests that, due to this volatility, measuring the value of something in dollars is like measuring the width of a physical object using a rubber band. He implies that this measurement is unreliable and arbitrary because you can ‘stretch’ it just like a rubber band.
He concludes that we should measure the value of something in ounces of gold instead.
Am I understanding Wiener correctly?
Funny you bring this up the day gold makes its biggest single-day USD move in history 👀
Measuring the stock market in fiat is more arbitrary than measuring it in gold.
A short video relating to that:
https://youtu.be/AGNvdN1Lw9A?si=b5vO7kx_pTRgEgrZ
Some added colour:
https://x.com/philippilk/status/2016089604588290348?s=46
Apparently, stocks have fallen since the dot-com bubble when measured in gold instead of dollars: https://x.com/elerianm/status/1976237139185574170
Some comments suggest measuring stocks in gold is arbitrary, others say this development is simply due to inflation.
Are they right or is this development a deeper sign that the economy is in trouble?
Drugs are a net negative for society.
(This branch of the conversation has been moved to #4137)
The purpose of the law isn’t to minimise negatives and maximise positives. The purpose of the law is to uphold the rights of people.
This is speculation, see #4106. If it really becomes an issue, I can retire the feature or improve it.
I plan to go piecemeal by starting with reactions to ideas as a whole, then maybe to paragraphs/block-level elements down the line.
Would this work better as a criticism of #4058? That way, the relationship between these ideas might be clearer, and there’d be the possibility of a criticism chain.
Related to #4062, making any part of the drug trade illegal just gives gangs and cartels a leg up over law-abiding citizens.
But that way, you pretty much ensure that only scumbags sell drugs. And they definitely don’t care about their customers.
Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.
Maybe it does. Any kind of reaction is a response that turns a criticism from unacknowledged to acknowledged.
Edit: …
Pointing out changes is discouraged. Version history and diffing take care of that for you.
I think the reason the limited set works well in X spaces is that there’s no text input. So there’s no way to sidestep the restriction.
For Veritula, it would be more like an emoji restriction on tweets. That wouldn’t work because you couldn’t stop people from posting arbitrary emojis in tweets by just typing them with their keyboards.
This seems both complicated and restrictive. People could easily sidestep the restriction anyway: nothing stops someone from leaving a comment with only a single emoji in it.
Too complicated/ambitious for a first implementation. Start piecemeal. But could be a promising approach if reactions to ideas as a whole end up being ambiguous (#2166).
I can speculate ahead of time, but I might implement reactions and find that this is not an issue after all. And if it is, I can either retire the feature or improve it.
But this doesn’t address the scenario where someone wants to react to no particular paragraph but the idea as a whole.
Agreed, thanks. Fixed in #4095. “Since decision-making follows the same logic as truth-seeking, you can use these trees to make decisions, too.”