Same question here lol

I aspire to knowing truth, which requires minimizing ideological inertia haha. It’s hard. Feel free to critique the update 🫂

I dunno, going back to the missile comment, I would trust you to have a gun, but I’m much less likely to trust you to carry a big red button. And it’s not even mostly about your potentially pressing the button, it’s the whole line of failure points between the button and the missile silo.

Somewhere in between gun and missile silo there’s a line that I think I’d probably want to enforce.

But I agree. You having a gun is a very low bar for trust. People who use guns or other means to take from others their health, property should be dealt with the right way - but yeah I don’t have a problem with the response being called a principle.

Not sure what you mean by “the only reason people break rules is because they exist”. I would guess that people will keep doing cocaine in places that legalize it, and they will also keep stealing cars post legalization. Maybe there’s an interpretation of the statement as a truism that I understand: rules that don’t exist definitionally aren’t “broken”?

I’m convinced, I’ll update it 🫂

X hypothetical pain, Y hypothetical utility, Z hypothetical difficulty in enforcing a rule about it

In this case maybe we could say x is huge, y is small, and z is high on an absolute scale, but low compared 59 x

What do you mean? By legitimate I just mean in a “real” way. I’m not completely convinced there is such a way of giving me that right, but I mostly mean to recognize here that if you were to “imply your consent” i would view it as definitely not consent.

Just missed it. Beautiful work 🫂

Is it possible you’re actually trusting a bit more than you think? Do you run a node? Do you know where the logic is that ensures the transactions your node verifies are in accordance with your desires and not someone else’s? Have you personally checked it? Is there any code on your computer than might cause it to be lying to you about what you see when you read that vs what it actually executes when validating blocks?

If you haven’t, checked these, then why?

I’m all for avoiding blind trust, I think that’s part of understanding the world. I also think it’s impossible. Devastatingly.

So we end up with some version of a trust oneself/masses/experts heuristic for a given situation.

If you haven’t read it, The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes is excellent on this topic. #bookstr

To what extent do they work on those people? Or do they just make the rest of us brave enough to come together to put them in a cage?

Noooooo 😂😂😂😂😂 Never have I wanted a Nostr delete feature more than now lol. I just wanted a graph and it was the best one I found. Man.. need a little more due diligence next time :)

All the miners are just guessing randomly. And that is precisely what makes it so nicely decentralized. Sometimes everyone is unlucky for a while instead of everyone except for one.

http://www.andygranowitz.com/2018/04/12/empirical-explanation-craig-wright-selfish-mining-bitcoin-bet.html

Any recent news on what is happening with this? I saw that Missouri has proposed state amendment that would ban local gun laws

I’m sorry. 🫂

I’m not saying people can’t choose for themselves.

I’m just saying if people rely on their own data collection and analysis, well people are pretty horrible doing that for topics like health. We are aware of so many logical fallacies and biases that humans predictably fall for. For example, we rarely actually take into account the survivorship bias in health gossip we hear. Our confirmation bias, availability heuristic, etc… That kind of stuff takes a properly set up and repeated study.

Not sure what you mean by who said statistics is the best answer. Statistics “is the discipline that concerns the collection, organization, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of data” and like I’ve said above people tend to have poor intuitions on how to transform observations into conclusions.

But I’m only talking about people who desire to have reliable conclusions. Folks who don’t (though I think I’ve never met one) don’t need to worry about it.

The face wouldn’t change things for me. Edge cases.. yeah. I’m looking forward to having the ability to run my own filter settings on Nostr.

Maybe someday we will be able to labels what we see for fine tuning, then buy training time with other anonymous people who have similar opinions on where the line is.

Yes

Alternative response: in most conversations mostly an inkblot test. What people associate with the mark of the beast seems to be much more correlated with what they fear than what might the scripture may actually be talking about.

Have you gotten a group chat going on it with normies? I’m kind of afraid to try.

Genes are just self-selecting themselves out of the pool.