🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@Liberty4Masses I think you are just using poor language here. You mean "perfect" not "accurate".. No data collect will be exhaustive or perfect. It doesn't have to be. Thats the beauty of how the math works. When the data is inaccurate the math detects it and results in very high uncertainty rates that let us know we cant make predictions. When we have good data we likewise know and are more able to act on it. We have tests for this in my field so we can know, it is hardly guess work.

Similarly while the data looses some accuracy over time, that isnt the same as saying it is inaccurate. The data doesn't need to be perfect to get useful results, again thats the beauty of it.

Again im curious where you studied, what field, and what degree. The things your saying seem naive of very basic entry level statistics and economics. That isnt meant as a jab at you, I may just be misunderstanding what your saying. This is why I'd love to see anything you did while studying. Being more technical I'd probably have a better understanding of where your coming from. Because right now it just sounds like you are naive to the basics. I think its really cool you studied the same stuff as me, so would love reading your stuff.

@Liberty4Masses We arent talking about economics as a whole, there are many things in economics where we have high error rates for sure. But to determine the ROI for a particular investment, that itself is pretty trivial.

I wasnt aware you had a degree. What exactly is your diploma in, what degree? Any Published papers? I'd love to read your work and catch up and talk shop sometime.

@Liberty4Masses Well no, not only is it possible, it is possible and we can easily prove that.

I think whatyou mean is that an exhaustive data set is impossible. That is true. But you dont need an exhaustive dataset to crunch the numbers accurately.

Like I said this is literally what my degree and my entier career is about. So I'd be more than happy to deep dive with you on the details as to why and how if you'd like. But as an expert on this topic I can say with certainty that it is very doable and even trivial. Far from impossible, and we can experimentally prove that.

@Liberty4Masses To be fair i guess anyone who isnt stuied in statistics and economics at a base level would find it non-trivial. But in terms of just what level of education is needed to know do and understand the math, well, not very high really. its entry level stuff once you have the data.

@mngrif I see you upgraded your anal plug too :)

@mngrif If you find the one you want I'll add it.

@mngrif Huh? Was this meant as a reply? A bing?

@Liberty4Masses You might not realize this but that is literally what i do for a living. The math is trivial, collecting the data is far more difficult.

@Liberty4Masses But yea, the reason such systems work so well is because there are people way smarter than your average person able to actually do the science to quantify that. Sadly your average american is a morons. If the population was highly educated bright people they probably could and would organize effectively. But that time is long behind us if it ever existed at all.

@Liberty4Masses No my answer is very simple and easy. I'll repeat it more simply:

"When the road would make the economy more money then it would cost it"

Which at least for those educated on such matters is a pretty trivial thing to determine.

@Liberty4Masses Well thats easy, it is the same answer we would use to ask ourselves when, exactly, is it justified for a government to invest money in a project, any project, vs leaving it to the individuals.

The answer to that is a simple one. Any time the project has an ROI for the **entire** populace that is higher than cost of said venture. So if the question becomes "do we build a road to some remote town" the government answers that question by considering the cost of the road and then the amount of money the economy would benefit from having people from those town have access to the rest of the world.

If there are enough people that the costs would be regained and then some by the tax payers as a whole, then that is the point when the road becomes justified.

@yaakosine
Oh right the colonies, they were also worried about starving to death each winter too, and yet still never developed any sort of a national highway network.

The point is highway networks are both an order of magnitude more expensive and requires national coordination to be done effectively.

No no one before government has ever built a national highway system anywhere near the level of financial investment needed. A few dirt paths prior to even the invention of cars.

In fact most "roads" in the colonies were just worn out paths formed by people walking it often enough.

@Liberty4Masses

@Liberty4Masses Yes I do. For one single man I agree. I never claimed that every remote village and every house needed a road attached to it. The point is we have homes and towns that are plenty big to warrant a legitimate need for a road, beyond just one man, yet it has no road. A clear demonstration that even is something is needed, critical, and life threatening to an entire large community they STILL will be incapable of properly organizing to the level of being able to build a national scale highway connection.

The argument is NOT "oh some remote villages will be without roads" the argument is that we can see that even when desperately needed people STILL will be incapable of building the roads. It disproves your assertion that if there is a need someone will voluntarily build it. They wont, even when the need is real, we have seen that.

@mngrif Oh apparently I already shared it with you:

https://qoto.org/@freemo/102373888580898586

https://qoto.org/@freemo/100895321209524738

https://qoto.org/@freemo/100727598562072074

@mngrif I'll link ya some screenshots.

@yaakosine
They didnt, there were no cars so roads (in the sense of being able to support traffic from cars) have never existed outside of government. There were foot paths and later horse paths. But thats not the same as a road in the modern sense.

I mean hell before governments people would stand a decent chance of dying on any long venture.

@Liberty4Masses

@mngrif If i ever finish my mmorpg (all text based) youll love it.. not sure if i ever will though :)

@Liberty4Masses Yes I've considered it. I'd say its pretty damn important. Afterall if someone in said town has a medical emergency good luck getting them to a hospital in time if your stuck using horses or hiking through the woods. I'd say thats all sorts of important.

I mean sure we could argue that the big corps might build roads to transport some goods to major city centers at best. But then again they will probably also fortify those roads so others cant use them by designing them specifically for their own transportation equipment. So what few roads might get built likely still arent going to be too useful to most people. Despite their huge importance no matter how you dice it.

@mngrif Best nethack varient IMO.

@Liberty4Masses Not sure thats entierly true for everything. We see plenty of counter examples to that. Even though the government provides roads there are some remote towns who have no dedicated road to get there, or the road access is very limited. IF this were true even in the current government people would pay for and buy roads where the current infrastructure happened to be insufficient. Yet We have no cases that I know of of anyone volunteering their own money to build a road. They just rely on the government and if they dont do it they accept the inadequate access and leave it alone.

The truth is a reasonable system seeks to minimize, to the extreme, what governments buy, I agree there. But to assume that should be 100% voluntary is an extremist standpoint I wouldnt agree with.