Search Ideas

Good question. It is not something I have thought about much myself, but I wanted to allow for the possibility that people may want to discuss keeping their digital devices tidy, not just physical spaces.

I suppose digital tidiness would consist of organising your computer, phone, or tablet in such a way that it is straightforward to find things when you need 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.

After our conversation today, I agree that chores don’t qualify.

Maybe a solution to the self-coercion for things like paying taxes is to internalise the fact that paying taxes keeps you out of prison, and that therefore it is good for you to pay your taxes. Putting paying taxes in it’s proper context for your subconscious.

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.

https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/unconflicted

Found this. Will read it when I have a moment to sit down.

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.

‘Excellence’ is very similar to pride.

I am stuck on the subject of self-discipline.

It seems important to be able to get things done, even when we aren’t in the mood for it (basic chores, for example).

But this conflicts with CR ideas to do with self-coercion.

Thank you, found a couple good ones.

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

Might have some more virtues to include.

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. The theory 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 changing policy and leadership without violence.

Fallibilism

This is the philosophical position that all human knowledge—every belief, theory, and observation—is conjectural, tentative, potentially incomplete, and potentially mistaken. It holds that there cannot be any conclusive justification or rational certainty for anything we might believe to be true (including observations).

Fallibilism is distinct from skepticism. Skepticism argues that because certainty is impossible, knowledge is impossible. Fallibilism agrees that certainty is impossible but denies that this invalidates knowledge. Fallibilism holds that people can and do possess real, objective knowledge, and that people can improve it through a process of error correction.

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