People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard • Hacker News Board

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#391

Post by pnutjam » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 12:44 PM UTC

mattnewport wrote: post #87

jcutrell wrote: post #67

B.E. is a subject I'm incredibly excited about. I'm glad to see this at the top of YC today. Every (somewhat major) decision I'm making now, I'm constantly reminding myself of various biases and silliness that I participate in unwillingly (or even sometimes willingly). I would say this study has been immensely helpful, and Thaler is a huge contributor to this for me. (Freakonomics, also, has been a great learning res…

Behavioral Economics falls prey to the same kinds of over simplifications it was a reaction to in regular economics. There are useful insights to be gained from both over simplifications but it's also good to remain aware of their flaws. To over simplify myself, traditional economics starts from the assumption that people are rational and then tends to over simplify the way they reason and the models of the world the…

It's similar to the classic spherical cows in many physics experiments.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#392

Post by wool_gather » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 12:48 PM UTC

comex wrote: post #324

gbacon wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We watch, we note abuses, they launch internal investigations, and they conclude that nothing was wrong. Case closed. Pay your taxes, citizen. Thank you; drive through.

> We watch, we note abuses, they launch internal investigations, and they conclude that nothing was wrong. And then, occasionally, there are protests in the streets, people start running for office pledging to fix the abuses, we vote for them, and things slowly start to change. Alternately, sometimes we sue them, or else a state or federal attorney general sues them; the matter ends up in the judicial system, and the…

Exactly: soap, ballot, jury, and hopefully we never get to the last step.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#393

Post by Nasrudith » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 1:03 PM UTC

aalleavitch wrote: post #98

sandworm101 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> collective action to decide No. Once upon a time we nominated experts to make most of those decisions. Groups like the EPA or the IRS were given a mandate to examine what was going on and ban behaviors that did harm. But today "regulation" is a bad word. Everything is political. The EPA and IRS cannot ban anything without massive public debate. In fact, most regulatory bodies are so under pressure to reduce any an…

What we lack is trust. We lack security in each other, in many cases for entirely legitimate reasons. Reestablishing systems of trust is one of the challenges we’re facing right now.

Reminds me of the one common Freudian slip I notice in the wake of a scandal. If they talk of restoring trust as a goal they are so irredeemably corrupt they see only the bad PR as a problem and not the heinous abuses. Since trying to fix the problem doesn't even come to mind to them as something to lie about when they are in hot water!

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#394

Post by wizzairflyer » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 1:12 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #375

wizzairflyer wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a legal challenge on the grounds that a certain religious minority is exempted from such service, the claim being that this constitutes inequal treatment. Kind of amazing that this is ground for a legal challenge but the fact that female aren't drafted isn't. That's one of the part of Western societies around which I can't wrap my mind.

There's increasing pressure to fix that too. Norway has introduced gender neutral draft two years ago.

I hope this get fixed eventually, either by extending it to both genders or removing it completely.

In Switzerland we had a small reform of our army and copying the Norwegians was considered for a while, but they ended up dropping the idea for just doing small changes. Quite disappointing.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#395

Post by ppeetteerr » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 1:31 PM UTC

rvern wrote: post #135

ppeetteerr wrote: post #34

This is probably the greatest argument for big government. If we were to eliminate the supervision of the establishment over the safety and security of everyday life, it would be very time consuming to handle every single aspect of it. There is always the issue of an overreaching government, and that's where the left/right party split comes in. Each party either creates more regulation and protection or take some awa…

No, this is one of the greatest arguments for small government or no government. People are more rational when the cost to them of being irrational is larger. Voting for good policies is a public good. When a voter is one among three hundred millions of citizens, only 1/300,000,000 (on average) of the benefits of the vote befall the individual voter. This gigantic externality means that the democratic market will sev…

> People are more rational when the cost to them of being irrational is larger.

Do you mean like buying a house they cannot afford for some ideal of home ownership? ;)

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#396

Post by Nasrudith » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 1:38 PM UTC

athenot wrote: post #22

nkrisc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to remind people that it's not "you versus AT&T" it's "you versus a quarter million experts in their respective domains." I would expect any average individual to lose against AT&T in whatever their issue is unless AT&T willingly concedes to them. Picking on AT&T for no particular reason.

That's an intersting point. Perhaps things would be more level if a conflict between an individual would be settled by selecting one RANDOM employee from that company (not the super ninja expert in the narrow field at hand), and have them battle it out in a lower court / arbitration.

That would work only slightly better than the top level salary cap being the lowest salary - dodged via a nesting doll of layered corporations as contractors or using actual ones. In that case they would have a top level entity with C-levels and elite lawyers which just so happens to own the rights and assume legal responsibility for the lower corporation.

In which case just save everyone the hassle and pass a law requiring proportionality to the degree of defined max lawyers per lawsuit of size defined in some workable metric so it doesn't take decades just to go through every mortgage in a AAA bank with solo lawyers on each side. It would limit the use of lawyer armies but it may lose a constitutional challenge on grounds of right to petition the government for redress.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#397

Post by Nasrudith » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 1:54 PM UTC

s73v3r_ wrote: post #151

peacetreefrog wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"One thing that always bothers me is how we have this myth of personal responsibility that supposes an individual is equipped to defend their own interests against a multinational corporation on their own." 1. Our wiring isn't perfect, but who is better equipped to defend a person's interests than the individual themself? Serious question. 2. I don't think the "power" and coerciveness of multinational corporations is…

"1. Our wiring isn't perfect, but who is better equipped to defend a person's interests than the individual themself? Serious question." Someone who actually knows something about the topic in question? It is highly in the interests of any person to have both a plentiful and safe food supply, and safe, breathable air and safe, drinkable water. Pesticides constantly straddle this line; how much pollution is acceptable…

Corporations and governments are both capable of screwing you over in different ways and often overlap. Corporations made the arms that shot the students of Kent State University and the government failed to protect people poisoned by pollution of Superfund sites. Hold them both accountable or they will be used by nefarious entities in the other as enablers for a workaround.

That said persistently refusing like many conscientious objectors will land you in jail though. It isn't a ridiculous argument but the literal truth. It also isn't a very effective tactic of protest but more a matter of fanaticism of principle.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#398

Post by randomdata » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #134

An interesting bit from the article was that he talks about 'sunk cost' with the defining example of ordering a dessert when you're nearly full and feeling compelled to finish it. > There was an economist once early in my career who said to me, “You know, if you’re right, what am I supposed to do? What I know how to do is solve optimization problems.” A career economist not wanting to change their ways because they h…

It can also sink individuals. I don't know how many times I have watched people fail to make a living in a dead-end career because "it is what I went to school for".

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#399

Post by arminiusreturns » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 2:25 PM UTC

raywalters wrote: post #117

Having worked front line technical support, I have to disagree. People are indeed dumb, many choose to stay that way.

Ignore these haters mate, I'm greybeard sysadmin type who did his time in the helpdesk trenches, and it's a fact despite the many protestations of the others here. Prost!

ps. I would correct though and say some people are dumb. I've met others on the other end of the spectrum too. Also, something something, the difference between ignorance and stupidity, etc.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#400

Post by todd8 » Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 2:26 PM UTC

rebuilder wrote: post #270

opo wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found your comment insightful, but I have to ask about this: >...I spent 6 months in prison as a conscientous objector. Could you elaborate? Under what conditions does a conscientious objector face a lengthy prison term?

In Finland, as a male, refusal to perform military or civil service is a crime punishable by approximately 6 months of imprisonment. I understand that very recently that has been put on hold as a result of a legal challenge on the grounds that a certain religious minority is exempted from such service, the claim being that this constitutes inequal treatment.

Are women not subject to these same requirements?