3 ms·
I imagine he would call the murdering part sinister, as opposed to the time spent doing something other than what is optimal. I agree with the GP that the oppo
by joebadmo 16y ago
I imagine he would call the murdering part sinister, as opposed to the time spent doing something other than what is optimal.
I agree with the GP that the opportunity cost argument is so wholly dependent on the judgment of the debated activity that it doesn't really pertain one way or the other.
That said, HFT doesn't strike me as something that adds value to the economy.
- pg 16y agoBaberuth and I are talking about whether it's sinister for A to criticize B's actions, not whether B's actions are sinister.
- baberuth 16y agoCorrect pg, though for the record, I do also avoid murder whenever possible. A criticising B is not a problem. A preventing B from doing something is sinister (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness).
- joebadmo 16y ago"Would you call it sinister for example to criticize someone for spending their time murdering people at random?" I'm saying it depends on what A is criticizing about B. It is not sinister for A to criticize B's action. I'm not sure if it's sinister for A to criticize B's misallocation of time spent. It's a weird thing to think about. I think it's weird to think about because, as was my point earlier, the judgment of whether the time was misspent is wholly dependent on the judgment of the way the time was spent.