4 ms·
> I was hoping that there would be a "solution" of sorts to tackle / handle this issue of when EVERYBODY seems to use this strategy, but perhaps there isn't one
by lovich 1y ago
> I was hoping that there would be a "solution" of sorts to tackle / handle this issue of when EVERYBODY seems to use this strategy, but perhaps there isn't one...?
It’s called government regulation. There’s whole fields of research on how to solve an arbitrarily complicated Prisoner’s Dilemma. A lot of people are allergic to the idea because they don’t want to have limits on their behavior, only on others or on no one at all.
So we get everyone picking the bad square in the Dilemma
- johnnyanmac 1y ago>A lot of people are allergic to the idea because they don’t want to have limits on their behavior, only on others or on no one at all. So are we doomed? if we don't vote in people who can properly regulate this, it seems the dilemma continues. But how does one convince an entire society to stop being so selfish and myopic?
- lovich 1y agoIf you want everyone to be able to do what they want without limit, and enough people are choosing a route to destruction, then yes we are doomed. I have no idea how to convince anyone anymore. Even people who claim to care about things beyond themself immediately round up the wagons the second they have a limitation imposed. Already in this thread there’s someone mocking government regulation with a strawman argument. I’d just find some people you can make a community with and hole up. The Curtis Yavins, Thiels, and Musks of the world appear to have willed their post democracy state into existence without how much anti democratic sentiment they pull. Gonna have to figure out what their “post constitutional” world is going to look like before anyone has any idea what a good oath forward will be
- collingreen 1y agoThe path -> oath typo at the end of your post is apropos in a world sliding fast into full on techno feudalism.
- b_e_n_t_o_n 1y agoGovernment regulation of shameful behaviour? That's worked out wonderfully in the past.
- lovich 1y agoEuropean governments have regulations for anti social behaviors that curb some excesses and they haven’t collapsed. So I would agree, they have worked in the past
- b_e_n_t_o_n 1y agoGive us some examples.
- collingreen 1y agoNo, u
- ajuc 1y agoWhy bother with these commie Europeans, let's start with US, shall we? Ever tried to walk naked in the middle of your city? What is the reason it's not allowed?
- lovich 1y agoHacker news told me to stop posting so fast (i.e. i pissed people off enough to flag) but belatedly, the UK has A.S.B.O.s, Germany has many laws and regulations against speech and being part of extremist groups. Both countries seem to be doing fine compared to the global competition
- pjc50 1y agoThe problem is now coming from the top: Trump is the ultimate victory of shamelessness. It evolved like antibiotic resistant MRSA. Which is why demanding a government solution is meaningless.
- potato3732842 1y agoYou're peddling government as a silver bullet. It's not. You're no less ignorant (a much milder word than I want to use) than the people who think various flavors of near-anarchy can magically work fine. Some people are allergic to your knee jerk silver bullet solution because often times it comes with downsides that are on comparable orders to the original problem, same as every other silver bullet being peddled by every other ideologue. Shit is complicated and care needs to be taken.
- lovich 1y agoI don't believe I called it a silver bullet. I believe I called it a solution to a specific situation the person I was replying to. You are no less ignorant(also a much milder word than I want to use for yourself) than anyone else who hears "government" and then goes on a tirade about how "gubment bad". Shit is complicated. That's why leaving it to the random chance of whatever happens in the market happens tends to lead to sub optimal outcomes unless the only metric you care about is efficiency. I find it comical that you end your post with "care needs to be taken" in response to me calling for government regulation, when government regulation is literally an organization making sure that care is taken. You can argue on any specific policy points easily, but notice I didn't suggest a concrete action yet, and you still were ready to argue against it because the government was mentioned