8 ms·

Google translates it as > Property obliges. Its use should also serve the public good. which is more or less accurate. > If you want to spend your resources

by musage 9y ago

Google translates it as > Property obliges. Its use should also serve the public good. which is more or less accurate. > If you want to spend your resources on public good, find a good charity. That's kinda like saying cars should only go fast, if you also want to not die when taking a breath outside, you have to wear a gas mask or deploy nanobots that remove pollutants from the atmosphere. Public transport is fastest when everybody just uses kung fu to move others out of the way, and when the doors are razor sharp and close on a timer -- if you also want people to not be injured, go to a hospital.

golergka 9y ago
> Property obliges. Its use should also serve the public good. Honestly, when I got this translation it was so absurd that I was completely sure that I miss something here. What does "property" oblige you to? How can state's constitution dictate to what end property can be used? If I would be living in a country with such a constitution, I would either try to change it, move somewhere else or just consider myself not morally bound by the country's laws as completely immoral. > That's kinda like saying cars should only go fast, if you also want to not die when taking a breath outside, you have to wear a gas mask or deploy nanobots that remove pollutants from the atmosphere. I think that for a productive discussion, we need to separate two things: main goal and side conditions. You have a good point that any paperclip optimizer should have necessary side conditions, like "not destroy the world while you're at it". However, in it's decision making process these conditions should be very different from the main goal: they should be simple boolean categories, just something that you have to maintain at all times, not a numeric parameter that you can increase indefinetly - this should be goal. Thankfully, companies already have boolean conditions like that, they're called laws.
- germanier 9y ago
  That part of the constitution is basically used to justify things like environmental or historical building protection laws. It binds the legislator to always consider the public good when enacting laws (and "public good" is defined by the legislator itself through the law). In particular, it has no binding effect to anyone apart from the legislator. It honestly isn't of that much importance in the grand scheme of things. Immediately preceding is the order to always preserve and protect private property.
- musage 9y ago
  X amounts of pollutants per mile might be fine, X * N amount might be "destroying the world". Encapsulating it in a boolean doesn't make it magically that simple.

by musage 9y ago

golergka 9y ago

> Property obliges. Its use should also serve the public good. Honestly, when I got this translation it was so absurd that I was completely sure that I miss something here. What does "property" oblige you to? How can state's constitution dictate to what end property can be used? If I would be living in a country with such a constitution, I would either try to change it, move somewhere else or just consider myself not morally bound by the country's laws as completely immoral. > That's kinda like saying cars should only go fast, if you also want to not die when taking a breath outside, you have to wear a gas mask or deploy nanobots that remove pollutants from the atmosphere. I think that for a productive discussion, we need to separate two things: main goal and side conditions. You have a good point that any paperclip optimizer should have necessary side conditions, like "not destroy the world while you're at it". However, in it's decision making process these conditions should be very different from the main goal: they should be simple boolean categories, just something that you have to maintain at all times, not a numeric parameter that you can increase indefinetly - this should be goal. Thankfully, companies already have boolean conditions like that, they're called laws.

germanier 9y ago
That part of the constitution is basically used to justify things like environmental or historical building protection laws. It binds the legislator to always consider the public good when enacting laws (and "public good" is defined by the legislator itself through the law). In particular, it has no binding effect to anyone apart from the legislator. It honestly isn't of that much importance in the grand scheme of things. Immediately preceding is the order to always preserve and protect private property.
musage 9y ago
X amounts of pollutants per mile might be fine, X * N amount might be "destroying the world". Encapsulating it in a boolean doesn't make it magically that simple.