Search Ideas
1824 ideas match your query.:
… I still think there are good and bad criticisms …
To conclude that a criticism is bad, we first need counter-criticisms. Otherwise, we have no reasons for considering a criticism bad. And once we have those reasons in the form of counter-criticisms, we can just state them.
"that"
Why is this word in quotes? If you mean to emphasize, use asterisks.
Since you’re voicing a disagreement, this idea should presumably be marked as a criticism.
… there is no difference between what I said and what you said.
Unclear what “what I said” and “what you said” refer to. Quotes
than
Should be ‘then’. I remind you to run your ideas through Grammarly before posting.
You can still tell whether some knowledge is true. You just can’t tell infallibly, ie with absolute certainty. There is a difference between certainty and knowledge.
If “good” is considered the same as “not bad” doesn’t that close the gap between Deutsch and Popper? (Using Edwin’s conception of good and bad.)
Do you have a quote of Edwin saying good = not bad?
We could try to save Deutsch’s terminology this way, sure. But I don’t think that’s what he means. He sees room for different gradations of ‘good’. For example, from BoI ch. 9:
[W]e should choose between policies not on the basis of their origin, but according to how good they are as explanations: how hard to vary.
It’s an understandable concern. I subscribe more to the insight from BoI chapter 10. Open societies inadvertently give their enemies more access than closed ones, but they also gain so much more knowledge and strength because of their openness that they can deal with their enemies better than if they were closed.
(I went back and forth on whether to label this as a criticism. I decided to do so but I want to be clear that it doesn’t mean I’m trying to tell you how to live your life.)
As a reminder, at some point we will need to do some housekeeping because any criticisms of #2108 are probably also going to be criticisms of #2109 and we want an intact criticism chain.
I’m marking this as a criticism so we don’t forget. And when we’re done with the housekeeping, we can say so in a counter-criticism to ‘check off’ that todo item.
Sorry but I don’t see how that solves the bad-actor problem. Bad actors would still be able to draw out the discussion to avoid paying, wouldn’t they?
Idea: when you create a bounty, you set the amount you’re willing to pay per criticism and a ceiling for the total you’re willing to spend (no. of crits * amount per crit).
Your card is authorized for twice the ceiling. In addition, there’s a button to report abuse. If you’re a good citizen, you’ll be charged the ceiling, at most. But if you’re found to submit arbitrary criticisms to avoid paying, the bounty stops early and your card is charged the full authorization.
If you submit a criticism, you won’t want to wait indefinitely to get paid just because others are keeping the discussion going in a different branch.
I suppose that would make it a bit harder for bad actors because they’d need to monitor multiple deadlines, but they could still submit arbitrary counter-criticisms just in time to avoid paying. Or is there something I’m missing?
… I am getting an error when I try to edit #2479…
Editing ideas should be fixed now. (You won’t need to edit this one, though, since I’ve done the requisite housekeeping.)
That is simply an extension of the fact that solutions to problems don’t come reliably.
Supply: A limited supply (scarcity) may increase the value.
The scarcity of a useless thing doesn’t make it less useless.
Is "it contains bitcoin's solutions to fiat, and also solves bitcoin's lack of privacy" easy to vary? Could be made harder to vary by explaining the technicals of zero-knowledge proofs as well (though I'm not konwledgeable enough to do that here).
Yes, that was what I was thinking. Presumably the OP could set their own deadline timeframe too.
As much as I dislike LLMs, I’m thinking of using them to show summaries of discussions at the top of the page. Summaries would reflect ideas without pending criticisms.
Some people – and I don’t know if this includes you or not – are overly worried about getting embarrassed or making silly mistakes.
There are some exceptions where reputation needs to be taken very seriously, but I think the general view to take in this matter is that no one cares. Think of the deepest embarrassment you’ve ever felt – and then try to replace that feeling with how others felt about your situation.
Like, if you’re on stage playing the guitar in front of hundreds of people, and you hit the wrong note, you may feel embarrassed. But many people didn’t even notice. And those who did probably didn’t care nearly as much about the mistake as you did.