Search Ideas
3485 ideas match your query.:
Not all cases of wanting more of something are cases of addiction.
I want to buy a second chair because I enjoy the first one, not because I cannot help but buy another.
Getting customers addicted means making it so they cannot exercise their free will (or have serious trouble doing so). They’re effectively unable to criticize ‘buy another’ as a course of action.
There's something to be said for a degree of complexity and novelty to a name. It lends air of thoughtfulness, and could spark curiosity in potential new users.
See also: "Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell", the highly successful educational YT channel. I know people who are big fans, and yet can't pronounce the name correctly.
'Veritula' is not a difficult name as compared to other highly successful explanatory enterprises, like 'Veritasium.'
Easier than ‘Veritula’, though. At least it’s a known word.
As of 8e0a6e1, comments on each idea are shown in the following order: criticisms first, regular comments last. Within each category, uncontroversial comments are shown first. Lastly, comments are sorted by creation date (ascending).
More or less a duplicate of #4349.
Could simply sort comments by pending criticism first, creation date second. (Variation of #4274.)
This has been implemented, sans page at /:username/bounties, which seems unnecessary.
Done, mostly as of 346fb25, then polished in 6dbf721, 5381525, 9f0f936, and 91e6f27.
Making alcohol illegal has been tried and was disastrous. Drugs are already illegal, which is arguably also disastrous. Those who advocate MAKING most drugs illegal but not alcohol are, I think, people who want to outlaw weed.
Drugs are currently illegal, and though drug-related deaths have gone down recently, in the US, they were at an all time high. Drugs being illegal does not seem to deter drug use enough, to off-set drug user's ability to use legal recourse, proper testing, and other such benefits of (legal) society.
Drugs are too broad of a category. Is widespread cocaine use the same as occasional magic mushrooms? The latter is suggested to have neuro-protective benefits.
Subjectively applies to every good product that makes its purchasers want to buy more of it. Like good food, video games, comfortable chairs.
If the drug + violation becomes a pattern, it's rational to outlaw it. (Assuming the outlawing works.)
E.g. alcohol is prohibited for drivers, even for drivers who are great drunk drivers.
In today's society they only have this ability to a limited degree, and would still have to deal with the drug users in public.
Communities could exclude drug users.
Violating the rights of other people depends on whatever their rights are. If we replace it with "desires", or use a libertarian way of saying "aggress on", then it's really just up to the people. I'd rather not live around drug users (depending on the drug), even if none of them physically assault me. I.e. "violation" is subjective, and ultimately decided by the polity that creates the laws.
Knowledge can exist outside any mind. A book contains knowledge whether or not anyone reads it.