1000 True Fans? Try 100 • Hacker News Board

Re: 1000 True Fans? Try 100

#221

Post by outsider101 » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 3:21 PM UTC

claudiawerner wrote: post #212

AmericanChopper wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All economies are made of people Economies are made of economic actors, which includes ALL people as well as other entities like public institutions, companies, charities... > some of whom do not make resource allocation decisions (because they are unable to or prohibited) Every single person in the world is an economic actor. Every single person in the world has the ability to make resource allocation decisions, e…

>Economies are made of economic actors, which includes ALL people as well as other entities like public institutions, companies, charities... But if we're applying hyper-reductionism, as in the case when the economists talk about individual actions and choices, all of those things can be further divided into individual actors. Why stop at the level of "economic actors"? Is there any basis for considering society as "…

Hi Claudia, I saw a comment of yours that had to do with on-line sexuality. I would really love to quote you on it for a manual for a tarot deck I'm creating. If you can could you reply here for find @outsidertarot on instagram and shoot me a message? Thanks!

Re: 1000 True Fans? Try 100

#222

Post by claudiawerner » Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 6:33 PM UTC

outsider101 wrote: post #221

claudiawerner wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Economies are made of economic actors, which includes ALL people as well as other entities like public institutions, companies, charities... But if we're applying hyper-reductionism, as in the case when the economists talk about individual actions and choices, all of those things can be further divided into individual actors. Why stop at the level of "economic actors"? Is there any basis for considering society as "…

Hi Claudia, I saw a comment of yours that had to do with on-line sexuality. I would really love to quote you on it for a manual for a tarot deck I'm creating. If you can could you reply here for find @outsidertarot on instagram and shoot me a message? Thanks!

Sure, go for it.

Re: 1000 True Fans? Try 100

#223

Post by toxik » Tue, Feb 11, 2020, 11:27 AM UTC

sacado2 wrote: post #125

toxik wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting point with the pyramid, a podcaster (Sam Harris) recently turned his free podcast into a "freemium" model where you get half of each episode for free. I imagine this is going to completely kill his following, as it did for me. Freemium is actually being charitable, it's more like shareware.

It's going to kill his following among people who want to follow him for free, but by definition they don't bring him any money. If you have enough paying users, meaning your business gained momentum, you don't really care about free users anymore.

Podcasts are spread by word of mouth. I will no longer be recommending it to anyone, and I imagine this is not unique to me. This kills the following it the long run.

Consider also the guest’s perspective. They want to teach a wide audience.

Re: 1000 True Fans? Try 100

#224

Post by marcusverus » Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 7:33 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #220

marcusverus wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we talking about a Star-Trek era future, once we've achieved something akin to full automation? Or do you think that this is something that is worth pursuing in the short term? Specifically, I'm curious as to who keeps the lights on in this new economy, and why they are working when work is unnecessary.

Eh, I don't think we need full automation. There are plenty of superfluous jobs today and the number of people to "keep the lights" on is probably 5% of the population or less.

Currently ~60% of the adult population is employed. How do you knock that down to 5%, while taxing that 5% enough to support the other 95%, without taxing so much that working isn't worth the effort? It sounds like you're advocating for a planned economy with 5% participation, which seems odd given that planned economies haven't worked in the past with 10X the workforce.