Boaty McBoatface and the False Promise of Democracy

Post by aninhumer » Sat, Apr 23, 2016, 12:03 AM UTC

carc wrote: post #261

aninhumer wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a false dichotomy. I do not believe everything should have a whimsical name nor do I believe they shouldn't. (Except in the sense that variety is preferable, but I don't think that's what you're getting at.)

Not supporting OP but their question is not at all a dichotomy. The question wasn't should everything have a whimsical name or should nothing have a whimsical name. The question was basically just should everything have a whimsical name. Sounds like your answer is no, because you're ok with things having whimsical names sometimes.

Post by tvararu » Sat, Apr 23, 2016, 3:19 PM UTC

chollida1 wrote: post #111

mrob wrote: post #2

The solution is simple. Continue calling the boat Boaty McBoatface. Ignore all references to the government's preferred name. They can choose what's painted on the side, but the name depends only on what people call it. If enough people call it Boaty McBoatface its name really is Boaty McBoatface. If your job depends on calling it the government's preferred name then subtly alter the timing of your speech to make it…

> The solution is simple. Continue calling the boat Boaty McBoatface. Ignore all references to the government's preferred name. This is good advice. In Toronto we have a baseball stadium called the Rogers Center ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Centre ). It was originally called the SkyDome but it was bought by a company called Rogers and renamed. Everyone still refers to it as the Skydome. Corporate branding b…

Post by ZenoArrow » Sun, Apr 24, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #199

ZenoArrow wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I rather like the concept, but I can see it having some interested and unanticipated side effects if you allow people to select their delegate by category rather than individual bill by individual bill." The point is that you can delegate for individual bills, as well as taking back your power to vote on individual bills. You can delegate by category, but you don't need to if it doesn't serve you. The idea is that…

Agree that you can delegate for individual bills, but my point was that most people won't delegate for individual bills most of the time, but probably will choose delegates for "categories" of decision making if the system is set up that way. Surveillance law is a pretty relevant example, since for most people not on HN it's a relatively low priority, and there's a fairly high likelihood that if they're able to deleg…

Post by vlehto » Wed, May 04, 2016, 8:13 AM UTC

clarkmoody wrote: post #132

vlehto wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why nobody has sortition, is because deep down democracy is about being as agreeable as possible to the median citizen. If you have vague feeling that you decided who is prime minister, you are more motivated to pay taxes and fight wars. The country that gets least tax evasion and most volunteers to army is likely to perform better than anybody else. And so survival of the fittest governments has favored d…

> you are more motivated to pay taxes and fight wars Well, you don't really have a choice in the former, and when there's a draft, you don't in the latter either. > The country that gets least tax evasion and most volunteers to army is likely to perform better than anybody else I disagree. You are elevating the state too high. I would counter that the countries with the most economic freedom -- those that have embrac…