Search Ideas
1938 ideas match your query.:
Big week on Veritula 🚀
✍️ A new editor: what you see is what you post.
📰 Long-form articles on your profile. Write one here.
🖼️ Pictures: drop or paste them into the editor; caption them.
💾 Drafts that save as you type and on cmd + s.
🙌 Revisions credit the critics who inspired them.
😎 Profile pictures. Set one here.
@moritz-wallawitsch has already posted his first article:
Moritz Wallawitsch·#5970·16 days agoComes to iOS Safari
Sadly, as of a recent iOS update, Apple removed the ability to trigger haptic feedback in Webkit browsers.
Should still work on Android, though.
Preference formation is a computational task. (#5255) To claim we’ve understood a computational task, we must have programmed it (Deutsch). Popper never programmed it, so he didn’t understand it. (To Popper’s credit though, he got pretty technical in defining verisimilitude, logical vs. empirical content, etc.)
Satisfying Deutsch’s yardstick means, in my professional opinion as a software engineer: writing working code to industry standards. It must compile, implement the desired feature with no known bugs, be as performant as the feature reasonably requires, have clean syntax, etc.
Not having programmed preference formation doesn’t show that Popper understood nothing about it.
#5256 doesn’t say Popper understood nothing about it. I think he understood it fairly well, far better than other philosophers, but we now understand it better today than he did.
I understand aspects of how capitalism works
Capitalism isn’t a computational task.
Again I think it depends on the test. I don’t think it’s a fundamental problem for the theoretician, more so for the applied epistemologist. But in general terms, you can just guess that one is more severe, and if nobody has a pending criticism of that guess, you can rationally go ahead with it.
I purposely avoid drinking any water past 8pm so I don’t wake up in the middle of the night having to answer nature’s call. But sometimes that still happens. How can that be?
According to this article, elevating your legs helps with fluid distribution. My understanding is that, as you get older, your body gets worse at fluid distribution. If you’re never horizontal during the day, fluid gathers in your legs. And if bedtime is the first time you’re horizontal, the fluid redistributes as you sleep, some of it gathers in your bladder, and you need to pee.
That explains why I had to use the bathroom in the middle of the night even though I don’t drink anything past 8pm. So I tried elevating my legs the next day, working from the couch for a bit in the evening. It worked! I didn’t wake up having to use the bathroom that night. (I still woke up for some other unidentified reason, but at least I can now rule out this cause.)
I was tired of slow, bloated Spotlight.
Then it hit me: I didn’t have to wait for Apple to fix it. I could just have Claude whip up an alternative.
Meet Blink: results in under 17ms vs. up to 1,083ms for Spotlight. Free and open source.
Download and install:
See demo:
New on V: a guide that walks you through your rejectable ideas and helps you rehabilitate them.
Check it from time to time to ensure harmony between your thoughts and your actions.
In addition, every rejectable idea on the site now has a ‘Rehabilitate’ link to the same guiding mechanism so you can help other people rehabilitate their ideas.
Try it today: https://veritula.com/guide
New on Veritula: criticized passages get red, overlapping highlights. Comments get gray.
See at a glance which parts of an idea are problematic:
Tags on discussions would solve the same problem with less. A discussion could carry several tags, and nothing would need its own pages, moderators or membership. Subreddits come with all of that.
“Group or maybe even replace discussions” leaves open two different designs. Grouping adds a level above discussions. Replacing removes them and has to move what hangs off them, like chronicles, the timeline, embedding, and the MCP endpoint’s discussion tools. Until it picks one, it can’t be built.
Veritula doesn’t have enough discussions yet to split into communities. There are few, and most have only a handful of people in them, so most communities would sit empty, and empty ones make the site look abandoned.
#4652 doesn’t say what people can’t do now that a community would let them do. A discussion already gathers ideas on one topic, so Ben could start one for his Wikipedia competitor today. Without the problem communities would solve, there’s no way to judge the design.
@tyler-mills I’ll leave it to you to see if this chart type would give V anything the tree doesn’t. Archiving this idea for now.
#6063 doesn’t say what the chart would show that the visual tree doesn’t. Since #3904, the tree has come to do what Tyler asked for there: every reply is a node, criticisms are red, and edges to pending criticisms light up, so you can see at a glance which threads are still open. Without a problem the tree leaves unsolved, there’s no way to tell whether the chart is worth building or how it should look.
Gray for both non-pending criticisms and neutral comments makes them look alike, though a criticism that’s been addressed is still part of the argument and a comment never was. The visual tree’s discs keep them apart: criticisms are red and comments gray, solid if rationally adoptable and hollow if not.
Segments can’t all be the same size on their circle and still sit within their parent’s arc. Say an idea has two criticisms, which split the first circle in half. If one gets a single reply and the other gets five, each of the six segments on the second circle takes a sixth of it, so the five replies span five sixths of the circle, well past their parent’s half. The chart would then no longer show what replies to what.
Each reply answers one idea, so addressing an idea’s pending criticisms directly is always the quickest way to rehabilitate it: one new criticism for each. Going further down the tree never takes fewer, so there’s no shorter path to show. What helps is going through them one at a time, which the guide now does (#2628).
Done, live now. Every idea with pending criticisms has “Rehabilitate” under it, which opens that idea’s guide, and “Guide” in the navbar goes through all of yours, starting with the ideas closest to being adoptable. Either way, it’s one pending criticism at a time: you can criticize it, revise the idea, move on, or skip. Moving on is the abandoning from #4089: it sets the idea aside for you alone, and the idea comes back if it gets new criticisms.
Same criticism as #6058: this feature would need to pay its rent somehow.
Maybe one day, when Veritula makes enough to pay for this feature.
Since people can now post on their profiles, there’s arguably no need for something other than ‘discussions’ outside of profiles anymore.
Renaming costs a lot. URLs like /discussions/… would need redirects, and the MCP tools and the code all say ‘discussion’.