Search Ideas

Integrity: The refusal to permit a breach between one's best ideas and one's actions.

Phrasing it in terms of ‘best’ ideas could be tricky. Recall that we don’t (currently) know how to classify ideas as better/best/worse/worst.

I suggest speaking of one’s convictions instead.

Rationality: The commitment to the ongoing deliberate use of conjecture and criticism.

This is vague and compatible with irrational uses of conjecture and criticism. People can use them to come up with evasions and lies.

Would it make sense to refer to #2281 instead?

Moral Ambitiousness

The only quote I could (quickly) find is lowercase: https://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pride.html#order_2:~:text=by%20the%20term%3A%20%22-,moral%20ambitiousness,-.%22%20It%20means%20that

I recommend getting in the habit of copy/pasting from original sources, and linking them.

What does digital tidiness mean to you?

The activity feed already shows updates to discussions. Could just include changes to the privacy setting there. And, whenever the privacy setting does change, notify participants of the change.

On second thought, the reason for the privacy change may well be related to the reason for any changes to the title or about section, so doing it in the same notification might actually be clearer for users.

A change to the privacy setting is notable enough that it requires a dedicated notification independent of any changes to a discussion title or about section.

Good call. I made the pagination ‘sticky’ as of 1e7a85d. Archiving this but let me know if something isn’t working right.

Yeah I’d consider discipline irrational because it means one part of you coerces another.

Having said that, there could be value in learning how to deal productively with situations where you cannot avoid coercion. Like the government forcing you to do your taxes, which you will only do if you translate that external coercion into internal coercion. Nobody else can really coerce you, only you can coerce yourself. It would be nice to do this productively and also in a way that doesn’t practice/internalize self-coercion. And it should be rare. I don’t think basic chores qualify.

In later implementations, I could maybe implement a ‘soft’ delete or grace period. Or I could keep the associated records and rely on authorization rules to prevent access. But as of right now, that’s a premature consideration.

Those could be deleted when the user is removed.

Have you seen: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/core-objectivist-values

Might have some more virtues to include.

This functionality is pretty standard across apps. You can be removed from Discord servers, Telegram channels, etc without warning or reason at any time. People generally know and accept this. If they still put in effort, that’s on them.

That depends on a bunch of factors, including their relationship with the discussion owner, into which Veritula has no visibility.

That risk could be clearly communicated in the UI.

Maybe you remove them because you don’t even want them to be able to see anything.

There’d probably be a bunch of edge cases with this approach. For example, others would still be able to comment on those ideas, and the comments would have to be hidden from OPs. Which begs the question of how that impacts the displayed criticism count… And so on.

If you later realize that adding someone was a mistake, you should be able to correct that mistake.

There could be hard cutoff: they lose access to everything, including their own ideas in that discussion.

My critique of David Deutsch’s The Beginning of Infinity as a programmer. In short, his ‘hard to vary’ criterion at the core of his epistemology is fatally underspecified and impossible to apply.

Deutsch says that one should adopt explanations based on how hard they are to change without impacting their ability to explain what they claim to explain. The hardest-to-change explanation is the best and should be adopted. But he doesn’t say how to figure out which is hardest to change.

A decision-making method is a computational task. He says you haven’t understood a computational task if you can’t program it. He can’t program the steps for finding out how ‘hard to vary’ an explanation is, if only because those steps are underspecified. There are too many open questions.

So by his own yardstick, he hasn’t understood his epistemology.

You will find that and many more criticisms here: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/hard-to-vary-or-hardly-usable

We are also never the passive recipients of our knowledge; we are the creators.

Out of scope for fallibilism.

Some of those ideas are freedom, privacy, and free markets.

Out of scope for fallibilism.

This means that we can't be certain about anything, because we don't have a criterion of truth.

First sentence already implies this.

I’ve made dozens of pizzas by now. I’ve gotten pretty good at it.

Ingredients

• Store-bought dough (312g)
• Tomato sauce (70g, low sodium)
• Mozzarella (whole milk, 100g – fresh will taste better but will also make the dough less crispy due to juices)
• 2g extra virgin olive oil (optional)
• Semolina flour

Then, for garnish:

• Oregano
• Fresh basil leaves
• A dash of salt

Steps

1. Preheat oven for 1 hour. Ends up somewhere around 450°F.
2. Preheat pizza steel for 30 min on top rack underneath broiler, reaches about 650°F.
3. In the meantime, rest dough on counter top until it reaches room temperature.
4. Grate cheese and measure tomato sauce.
5. Dust counter with semolina flour and stretch the dough. Make it thin so it gets crispy.
6. Add tomato sauce.
7. Place dough on peel.
8. Place dough on steel; still on top rack with the broiler still on.
9. Bake for 2 minutes.
10. Take out to add cheese and oregano.
11. Bake for another 1.5 minutes on top rack; again, the broiler is still on. Can turn it off halfway through if the pizza is burning on top but the center of the dough needs more time to bake.
12. Optional: take out steel and let pizza rest on steel for another minute to make the bottom crispy.
13. Optional: in the meantime, apply small amount of olive oil to the outer crust and sprinkle salt on outer crust. (Kind of overrated, not really worth the extra calories.)
14. Remove from steel and serve.

I don’t think animals are sentient.

I realize this view sounds outlandish to most but it’s a considered, researched conclusion.

There’s lots of evidence of insentience in the way animals behave. If they were sentient, they would not behave the way they do: https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/evidence-of-animal-insentience

Additional reasoning:
https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/animal-sentience-faq
https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/konrad-lorenz-hacked-animals
https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/animal-sentience-discussion-tree
https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/the-animal-rights-community-is-based-on-fear-a