Search Ideas
3238 ideas match your query.:
I don’t see how it matters for his argument. The value of anything fluctuates.
But gold isn’t fiat. The government can’t create more gold out of thin air.
Wiener’s critique of the dollar applies to gold, too. Both fluctuate. I see no rational preference for gold following from his argument.
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.
Drugs are a net negative for society.
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.
Getting someone hooked on an addictive substance to get repeat business is predatory. It’s not an honest way to do business. Even if consuming drugs was legal, maybe the selling of drugs should still be illegal.
Need ‘standing’ bounties: they don’t expire. I keep finding myself wanting a standing bounty for #3069 so I don’t have to re-run expiring bounties.
Feature idea: pay people to criticize an idea.
You start a ‘bounty’ of an arbitrary amount (min. USD 5), which is prorated among eligible critics after some deadline.
There could then be a page for bounties at /bounties. And a page listing a user’s bounties at /:username/bounties.
When starting a bounty, the user writes terms for the kinds of criticism they want. This way, they avoid having to pay people pointing out typos or other unwanted criticisms.
Anyone can start a bounty on any idea. There can only be one bounty per idea at a time.
To ensure a criticism is worthy of the bounty, the initiator gets a grace period of 24 hours at the end to review pending criticisms. Inaction automatically awards the bounty to all pending criticisms at the end of the grace period.
Veritula should have some way to acknowledge an idea, including a way to show that a thread is resolved, at least for the time being, without having to comment.
Veritula should have some way to acknowledge an idea, including a way to show that a thread is resolved, at least for the time being, without having to comment.