5 ms·
You may just be working with a poor definition of value if you consider giving people what they want to be at odds with it.
by Trundle 11y ago
You may just be working with a poor definition of value if you consider giving people what they want to be at odds with it.
- Houshalter 11y ago"Value" is not equal to "what people click on". That's just what's easy to measure. The more you optimize the second goal, the more it will diverge from what people actually value.
- vehementi 11y agoIs heroin a very high value product?
- unchocked 11y agoAbsolutely, judging from what people are willing to pay. Arguments against heroin are invariably rooted in negative externalities. I have never heard anyone argue that there is no demand for heroin.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoWho said anything about demand? This is what I meant when I said you were defining "value" in narrowly economic terms.
- vehementi 11y agoThe "value" of heroin comes from it tricking your brain with chemicals that you need it and will die otherwise. I WANT IT GIVE IT TO ME == value, without follow up questions? Similarly buzz feed tricks you with catchy titles. Oh look the end result was I clicked it, therefore it has tremendous value without further analysis.
- Trundle 11y ago"Tricking your brain with chemicals" is a ridiculous way to dismiss something that people like. Every desire or want we have is the result of chemicals.
- nitrogen 11y agoOur desires and neurochemistry evolved in a very different environment from today. I think it's fair to say that a chemical that mimics an evolved desire/reward system without actually fulfilling the need that system serves is "tricking" the brain.
- Trundle 11y agoBecause of our different environment, none of those "needs" really exist though. Being part of modern society basically guarantees we stay fed and sheltered. Very few people are trying to procreate as much as they can. Some of us are choosing not to at all. We eat high calorie foods because our brain tells us its good even though we're a little fat. We fuck each other because our brain tells us its good, while we use contraceptives. We go out and try to be successful because our brain tells us it's good even though our base needs are already provided for. Sure you can say that we're tricking our brain, but only so far as you can say everything we've done since we discovered conscious thought and developed agency is tricking the brain. Hence why I find pointing it out in a specific case a little silly. "Hey you're only doing that because it feels good!" Well yeah duh? Same reason any of us are doing anything.
- vidarh 11y ago> The "value" of heroin comes from it tricking your brain with chemicals that you need it and will die otherwise. Most people who use heroin do not become addicted. The addiction rate for heroin is 23% according to National Institute on Drug Abuse [1]. Note that this is overall addiction rate, not the percentage of heroin users that are addicted, as most heroin addicts do not remain addicted. In other words: The value of heroin for most users is the high, not that it satisfies an addiction. [1] https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/heroin https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/heroin
- TheOtherHobbes 11y agostreet price != value I'm guessing by "negative externalities" you mean "people who object to having their property stolen by desperate junkies, or who would rather not get caught up in the violent fallout from drug gang wars." How do you propose to put a value on that?
- unchocked 11y agovalue = street price - net negative externalities The negative externalities you mention are much more a result of prohibition than of the drug itself. But under current law I'll give you that they're real, though simple policy fixes would largely eliminate them. The negative externalities to which I'm referring are primarily the addictive nature constraining the users' future choice, and the chance of an early death resulting from overdose (though that is arguably a result of prohibition as well).
- leereeves 11y agoThose aren't externalities, just costs. an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit
- Trundle 11y agoDepends on the person. For some, incredibly so.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoYou may be working with a excessively technical/economic definition of "value" rather than the common human one, if you believe that the only meaning of "value" is "monetary profit."
- Trundle 11y agoHuh? I didn't say anything about monetary profit. Users don't profit monetarily when they read buzzfeed articles so I have no idea how you would have got that idea.
- dredmorbius 11y agoRather than knee-jerk dismiss the suggested interpretation, why don't you simply tell us how you define value?
- Trundle 11y agoSomething that people want.
- PhasmaFelis 11y agoIf that's your entire definition of value, it's overly narrow. Lots of people want things that are directly bad for them. Letting a five-year-old eat candy until his teeth fall out is not providing him a valuable service. To get back to the original subject, reasonable people can perhaps debate whether the explosion in clickbait articles is "good" or "bad" in whatever sense, but it doesn't follow from that that "value" lies solely in satisfying people's most immediate wants.
- dredmorbius 11y agoYet another case of the HN hive-mind downvoting inconvenient truths.
- dredmorbius 11y ago
- tomc1985 11y agoFunny thing is, most people don't know what they want, or they do but it's bad for them, or it's good for them but bad for many others. The set of people whose wants should be satisfied is much smaller than the set of people who want.
- Trundle 11y agoOnly if you use some vague, hypothetical concept of want. To me wants are the things people pursue. Seeing as people act, the idea that they don't know what they want is silly. To say that peoples wants are bad for them or they should not get what they want is a paternalistic concept that I don't care for nor find particularly actionable.