Show newer

Many people are criticising the new law that made this possible.

But the focus should be on decades-old discrimination by the law that gives one extra year of retirement compared to !

rmx.news/switzerland/swiss-man

🇨🇭

tripu boosted

End-to-end encryption isn’t compatible with scanning our messages against a law enforcement database. Period. #StopTheEARNITAct2022 act.eff.org/action/stop-the-ea

🇪🇸

_cantar_ → _canta_
_recordar_ → _recuerda_
_extender_ → _extiende_
_abolir_ → ❓

Answer without looking it up.

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck:

> _“After being hacked I’ve lived without and for four years and life has been fantastic. I can confirm that life is very good without Facebook and that we would live very well without Facebook.”_

bloomberg.com/news/articles/20

OK, it's official: to me, said everything of substance that he had to say a few years ago, and now he's an embarrassing and pompous mess.

jordanbpeterson.com/podcast/s4

@fidel

I guess I should wait for your post to engage with your arguments in full, but I'd say that if “our current present” [sic] is your Exhibit A, then by all means bring it on. I mean that the world in 2022 (or at least _my_ world in 2022) is freaking awesome — whatever level the knob of is at, it can't be that far from the optimum.

Also, I think that unless one is a moral relativist, sure there are _some_ things we all should agree are good or bad for human beings in general. Those few things should be the scope of public policies, government, taxation and (I'll say it) even coercion. Isn't that just a corollary of “freedom cannot be absolute”? I don't think Scott (or any one person) is saying _he_ personally knows what's best for everyone: of course hard limits on personal freedom should be discussed publicly, implemented carefully, kept to a minimum, and grounded in science, philosophy, History, etc.

tripu boosted

@fidel But I'm very interested in that post in the making! :)

@fidel

That seems embarrassing, and I've been hearing about the sclerosis of for a while, too.

But I feel that proving a non-libertarian wrong in the abstract is indeed very difficult: is not arguing that governments and public agencies are always everywhere better than the private sector at everything they set to do — he's showing that they are not always_worse_. This is intuitively obvious; ie none of the two extremes (absolute statism or ) is desirable.

If you're a moderate, a centrist, or even a , this comes as no surprise — no matter how many outrageous pieces of evidence you can collect to illustrate that “the other side” is sometimes inefficient, expensive, or even harmful…

This. 👌

> _“I have in no point in this pandemic had a strong opinion about or public health measures. **I have just had a strong opinion that it makes no sense for unqualified people to have strong opinions on these matters**, and that it's dangerous when you have millions and millions of people deciding that their intuitions about a brand new patogen and the first significant in anyone's lifetime should supersede the product of rational, scientific investigation by those who are most qualified to perform it.”_

samharris.org/podcasts/qa/vacc

I like blockchains, and I love . But this nonsense is clouding even Sam's thinking. Case in point:

> _“What we're proposing to do at is to create our version of the [Giving What We Can] Pledge. We might add some other relevant wrinkle to it, but basically it would be the same pledge. We want to create based on the ‘daily heads’ that have become this ever present piece of artwork within the app, and give them out to perhaps 10,000 people who have taken that pledge. Consider what this will make possible. […] **It's the kind of idea that this technology has suddenly made possible. Everything I just said would make no sense without the and NFTs.**”_

Er… _what?_

Your use case is: “I want to publicize that these people have signed this oath, or donated this much money — and create a cute avatar for each one of them”. You are the CA (Certificate Authority), you have a URL, and you can create and assign as many personalised images as you want.

is already doing that (minus the JPEGs), the Waking Up Foundation can do that, and anyone can do that with early-90's web tech.

How are a distributed public ledger, a consensus mechanism, and a mining algorithm essential, or even useful, here?

samharris.org/podcasts/making-

> _“**No society can be simultaneously fair, free, and equal**. If it is , people who work harder can accumulate more. If it is , people will give their wealth to their children. But then it cannot be , for some people will inherit wealth they did not earn.”_

After [my first three _weeknotes_](blog.tripu.info/tags/weeknotes), I think I can ✔️ this project.

Only 49 to go!

@fidel

👍

Very interested in your thoughts.

I just read, over the course of several days, 's [“Non-Libertarian FAQ”](slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/22/) (years ago I had only skimmed it).

It is a brilliant text, as usual, and it reminded me why although I read and flirt at times with different ideologies I remain mostly a — why I don't call myself a or an ; but rather someone with libertarian sympathies, or perhaps a (classic) .

It reminded me why absolute or as ideologies and moral systems, in particular, may feel rational, coherent, complete and desirable… without being any of those things.

Which does _not_ imply, of course, that some specific governments nowadays would not do better by moving closer to the libertarian pole!

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.