Plans you're not supposed to talk about • Hacker News Board

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#531

Post by norswap » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 12:28 PM UTC

raxxorrax wrote: post #515

norswap wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of "the normal way" things are done is related to subtle (and by-design, unspoken) social reasons. If you are open-minded, you're open to considering that the normal ways things are done might not be the best way -- which it is not along all axes, but it does incur some advantages for reasons that must remain unspoken for the advantages to be incurred. This has two potentially bad consequences: (1) you mig…

I don't think monogamous relationships have something to do with them being sacred and more with partners that have incentives and expectations for their emotional involvement. I believe open relationships are the opposite of maturity and lack commitment and of admittance to yourself and your own needs. But I have no experience here, it just seems silly to me that if two people are unhappy to pull even more people in…

I knew this was going to turn into a debate on polyamori lol. I'm not going to answer your comments, but it suffices to say you probably don't suffer from your open-mindedness :)

(Agreement or disagreement on open relationships being immaterial to open-mindedness. The open-minded attitude is to consider what might make a stance true. Instead, to preserve your priors on open relationships, you're forced to assume a bunch of things, such that I am lying, and that I am unhappy, etc...)

Your comment about the social zeitgiest is interesting. Where I live (in western Europe) open relationships are quite unpopular (despite being more popular than they've ever been). I actually expect the same to be true in the US, outside of some affluent circles (if we're talking about in-the-flesh relationships).

How would you define conservatism?

(I don't consider my definition as negative btw. I have a conservative mindset on quite a few things where I think improvement is hard, or we're stuck in a local optimum and the cost of getting out would be currently unbearable.)

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#532

Post by norswap » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 12:38 PM UTC

Jemaclus wrote: post #340

cheschire wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly certain that not all marriages are based on fear of the potential pain of open relationships. Sure, some folks may be motivated along the lines you speak of, but there's plenty of us who got deep into it because we value the depth that comes from that one forever-friendship that is intimate on a level that can't be experience with the guys from the bar. So, yeah, careful about painting with too broad a bru…

> I'm fairly certain that not all marriages are based on fear of the potential pain of open relationships I don't think that's what the parent comment was saying. I read it as "being too open-minded can backfire on you, and here's an example of how," and not as "people only get married because they're afraid of open relationships," which is how I read your sentence. On the other hand, you assert that you "got deep in…

I endorse this message!

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#533

Post by ClumsyPilot » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 12:38 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #335

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Money is created when money is loaned out against collateral. Money is destroyed when the loan is repaid and the collateral returned. It's a natural process." But there is nothing natural about it - the limit on money supply is how easy it is to get a loan. Bank could give out mortgages with 0% deposit, they could give out loans equal to 120% of the house value, and they indeed have done so. What regulates the money…

> But there is nothing natural about it The natural pressures are the law of supply and demand. If the bank creates too much money relative to the collateral, it risks a run on the bank. Too little, and the bank goes out of business because it isn't making money. > Is having no rules free market? Yes (other than you cannot force people to do business with you nor can you defraud them). > The amount of money in the sy…

'If the bank creates too much money relative to the collateral, it risks a run on the bank.... This is called "fractional reserve banking". '

I dont fully understand the system, and its clear neither do you, or most people commenting here

We have not been using fractional reserve banking for at least 60 years now, as you sibling comment and this paper by the bank of England Explains. The only thing limiting hiw much bank can loan are capital requirements in the rules passed by parliament.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-...

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#534

Post by norswap » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 12:39 PM UTC

cheschire wrote: post #279

norswap wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big part of "the normal way" things are done is related to subtle (and by-design, unspoken) social reasons. If you are open-minded, you're open to considering that the normal ways things are done might not be the best way -- which it is not along all axes, but it does incur some advantages for reasons that must remain unspoken for the advantages to be incurred. This has two potentially bad consequences: (1) you mig…

I'm fairly certain that not all marriages are based on fear of the potential pain of open relationships. Sure, some folks may be motivated along the lines you speak of, but there's plenty of us who got deep into it because we value the depth that comes from that one forever-friendship that is intimate on a level that can't be experience with the guys from the bar. So, yeah, careful about painting with too broad a bru…

I think you can find beauty / intrinsic meaning in marriage, and that it can be done for other reasons than forced commitment.

But I'm not trying to explain why you (or anybody else in particular) committed to a single person romantically. I'm trying to explain why it's popular in general.

Imagine we could reset social norms around monogamy. Maybe you would still be monogamous for other reasons. I suspect many monogamous people, without the normative baggage, would go polygamous -- i.e. they don't consider monogamy to be intrinsically superior/good the way you do. I also suspect that over time the norm towards monogamy would creep back in for purely pragmatic reasons.

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#535

Post by goodluckchuck » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 12:59 PM UTC

salt-thrower wrote: post #230

mherdeg wrote: post #54

Reading this gave me a kind of horrifying idea that goes something like: You know about a deadly disease whose most serious outcomes can be avoided by getting a shot. Many members of a group in your society have decided they don't want to get the shot. You are annoyed by the way they talk about a lot of things, including the way they talk about avoiding the shot. They, in turn, call you "smug" for the way your group…

What's the difference between: A) smugly telling them to do it so that they won't do it, and B) genuinely telling them to do it because you care about public health, but they interpret it as smug? Also, the kind of reverse psychology you're describing generally only works on children.

Exactly, just like that!

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#536

Post by ClumsyPilot » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 1:01 PM UTC

nickpp wrote: post #512

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Asteroid and vulcanism are the usual culprits" That is nature, thats my point - it is brutal and murderous. If you don't want to die from them you don't rely on Darwinism and if you don't want economic collapse and famine every time a new strain of flue evolves you dont wait for 'muh free market' to save you.

Nature is unpredictable and always changing. This is why any attempt at planning markets is destined to fail. And it has - the specter of famine was always-present during my life under communism. Darwinism means adaptation. In markets, when people are free and allowed to keep their (majority of) gains, they will struggle to learn, change and adapt. Planners are neither motivated nor able to do either. They are the on…

"Planners are neither motivated nor able to do either. They are the ones bringing the economic collapse."

Erm, no, its the briliant free market optimised supply chains that have failed and gave us this inflation.

The free-market has ensured that the entire continent of North America produced Zero medical masks in the first year of the pandemic because there is no meltblown production on the entire continent. There was zero stock because everyone is 'just in time manufacturing'

It is also free market that controls the velocity of money, and when people can't get the goods they need because they are all stuck on the other side of the olanet, they start outbudding each-other and yiu get inflation. Eve all central bankers stopped existing before this crisis, the inflation of consumer economy would be exactly the same

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#537

Post by candiodari » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 1:05 PM UTC

GhettoComputers wrote: post #500

raxxorrax wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chicken spoils quickly too, but you aren't usually storing it in large quantities. But maybe it was also worms, just reinforces the point.

Pigs make lots of manure, lbs of it.

If you think pigs are bad with the environment, watch until you see the environmental damage that goats do. They literally graze everything to the ground. They fatally wound most trees. They leave behind desert.

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#538

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 1:07 PM UTC

guidoism wrote: post #69

bsedlm wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but why are you so adamant on making everybody so perfectly safe? there used to be something about freedom and risk; heck, about life and risk. it's risky to be alive but it was more risky live way back in the day at what point does safety begin to stifle the drive to live? we as humans originally evolved in a risky environment, we thrived in it, we made it safer for ourselves; but maybe, just maybe, we also acquired…

Less about making those people safe and more about making you safe by making those other not spread the disease to you. For example: Go ahead and drive drunk, I don’t care, just do it on your private property so you don’t kill me. Similarly: Go and don’t get vaxed, honestly I don’t care. But viruses don’t respect borders like cars do, so if you are going to do it then make sure you are isolated on a private island wh…

Why does someone unvaccinated pose a risk to you?

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#539

Post by ClumsyPilot » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 1:07 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #338

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Asteroid and vulcanism are the usual culprits" That is nature, thats my point - it is brutal and murderous. If you don't want to die from them you don't rely on Darwinism and if you don't want economic collapse and famine every time a new strain of flue evolves you dont wait for 'muh free market' to save you.

You might want to investigate the economic collapses caused by government run monetary systems. Like the Weimar Republic you mentioned - that collapse led to Nazism. Not a ringing endorsement for central banking, amirite? BTW, are you enjoying the 9% haircut we all got in the last year courtesy of central banking?

"Not a ringing endorsement for central banking, amirite?"

Which type of spherical cow free-market economy should i compare it too? No matter what system i pick, from medieval gold based systems to modern floating currency, someone goes "ThaTs NoT Real Free MaRKet!" It's like communism, not real life system was ever the real deal.

Re: Plans you're not supposed to talk about

#540

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 1:09 PM UTC

noisy_boy wrote: post #348

imgabe wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you've already gotten the shot, you're protected from the disease. So, what is someone else not getting the shot going to do to you?

What it will do is that when those people who haven't got the shots start to be sick, they will throw their beliefs in the bin and go to the hospital. They will stretch the capacity and then when I need to go for an ailment different from this disease, I'll be queued up behind them and the treatment I get would be subpar. Disclaimer: I don't have the stats on hospitalization rates/capacity in places that have low rat…

Not enough ICU (too late when you get there anyway) is a political problem. In my country they reduced it with state funding (you got money for reducing beds, active monetary incentives) and now they ponder about vaccination mandates.

This is infantile blaming of others in my opinion. Worse, you don't even hold those that are really responsible to account. So my sympathy if you fail to get an ICU is limited.