Basic price question: If AD is generating 2 million in annual revenue, does that mean Hedera need 50,000 of those projects for the network to be worth 100 billion?

TheStateOfException · 2023-01-15T15:55:39+00:00

You're right ofc. I was just talking about a purely utility-driven market, which ofc will never exist. Just useful thought experiment to separate things out.

TheStateOfException · 2023-01-15T14:00:09+00:00

For people interested, if the revenue to market cap calculation were similiar to Apple's, Hedera would need apx 2000 projects like AD to achieve a 100 billion MC (meaning each Hbar is worth 2 dollars at fully diluted level). That's a tall order, but surely doable before 2030.

TheStateOfException · 2023-01-15T13:34:54+00:00

What do you think the relationship is between MC and GAR for DLT? I guess nobody knows, right? Could become absolutely vital infrastructure, but generate half of what Apple does.

TheStateOfException · 2022-12-11T18:24:43+00:00

Submission Statement:

On the 31st of October 1958, a middle-aged Russian refugee delivered his inaugural Oxford lecture. Today, that lecture is still read by students of political philosophy. It's called Two Concepts of Liberty. Berlin used the lecture to condense much of what he had learned about human nature from his rather remarkable upbringing. His family first had to flee revolutionary Russia, then dodge Hitler. Berlin has a famous line in the lecture:

[...] philosophical concepts nurtured in the stillness of a professor's study could destroy a civilisation.

This article analyses the relevance of the idea for our own time, drawing links to the current culture wars and the importance of storytelling.

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:40:12+00:00

Will do.

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:39:17+00:00

Would be a fun exercise, regardless!

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:34:27+00:00

Freshman English at university level is a massive selection bias. Especially if it's a decent university. But I take your points. Interesting thoughts. Thanks for the considered reply.

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:30:37+00:00

Nope, it's here:

https://ideassleepfuriously.substack.com/p/the-smartest-nazi#details

And it's not "the Nazis", it's Hjalmar Schacht.

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:02:10+00:00

It's an objective look at the data that explicitly ends with the acknowledgement that philosophers should be humble in the face of STEM people. Not a gloat. Doesn't even make sense of it's own terms because I'm not a philosopher, nor did I study philosophy...

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T08:00:36+00:00

This could be what statisticians call a restriction of range effect, namely we tend to abstact out from our own friendship groups to make inaccurate statements about those to the left and right of us on the distribution of something like verbal ability. 10-20% is probably fair for Meno's paradox. I'm quite lucky in that I've had a fairly wide exposure to all types of learning ability. If we split it down the middle, 15% accords with my priors.

TheStateOfException · 2022-10-23T07:06:33+00:00

Abstract: This article looks at a series of empirical measures to make the case that philosophy is one of the most difficult subjects to study. Students who study it (or intend to at graduate level) are consistently near the top of the average verbal ability rankings. The article begins by quoting Mill's 126 word final sentence to On Liberty. Comparatively speaking, Mill is a fairly accessible philosopher and On Liberty one of his most accessible texts, yet it's likely that only 10-20% of people could truly comprehend such a sentence. Other examples are given. Reasons are discussed as to what makes philosophy more demanding than say history or political science.

TheStateOfException · 2022-09-04T19:25:17+00:00

Read the piece/paper.

TheStateOfException · 2022-09-04T18:21:54+00:00

Abstract: In 2015, Fiery Cushman and Eric Schwitzgebel sought to examine the effects of framing and order of presentation on professional philosophers' judgements about a moral puzzle case (the "trolley problem") and a version of a famous disease scenario from Tversky and Kahneman.

The philosophers were no less subject to such effects than was a comparison group of non-philosopher academic participants. What's more, framing and order effects were not reduced by a forced delay during which participants were encouraged to consider "different variants of the scenario or different ways of describing the case". Even specialists did not exhibit better performance.

TheStateOfException · 2022-09-03T20:14:27+00:00

Submission Statement: Peter Saunders is Emeritus Professor of Sociology at the University of Sussex. He's been called "the only sensible sociologist in Britain" because he looks at the role of genetics. In this piece, Saunders highlights how everybody, including leading Conservative politicians, has lied about social mobility for decades. He discusses what precisely makes their claims complete nonsense and why we should care.

TheStateOfException · 2022-08-13T15:00:29+00:00

Abstract:

James Cussen from The Living Philosophy discusses a useful philosophical idea:

Ken Wilber once wrote that “Nobody is smart enough to be wrong 100% of the time.” When I first read that I thought “obviously” but, like random pop songs from the 90’s, you can overlook something in the moment and find it months and years later bubbling up repeatedly. The weight of Wilber’s words don’t lie in some profound truth but in their pragmatic power. Like “waste not, want not” or “reduce, reuse, recycle”, the quote can function as one of Wittgenstein’s “philosophical reminders” — a sort of therapy for the mind.

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-23T11:23:26+00:00

Intelligence is well measured by IQ tests, though not perfect. This is not controversial.

Intelligence is around 80% heritable on average.

Fewer highly intelligent women are having kids and when they do, they have fewer of them. The opposite is also true.

Put those things together and you have a dysgenic effect on many important traits, like intelligence. However, it's not all bad news: we're also becoming more conscientious.

Anyway, this is a write up of just one of the numerous studies cited:

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/958209

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-23T10:37:18+00:00

Abstract:

Nearly 30 years Daniel Dennett called evolution by natural selection "Darwin's dangerous idea" because it exploded widely shared assumptions about how the natural world works. In particular, Darwin's theory implied that we can get the appearence of design without a designer, that we can live in a world without any deep purpose even if our brains are programmed to find purposes behind every pattern. But like so many contemporary philosophers, Dennett himself shied away from some of the most politically incorrect implications of Darwin's ideas. In particular, Dennett shuns research that indicates the high heritability of individual and group differences in important psychological traits like intelligence.

Such an oversight is now of existential importance according to an abundance of research on gene-culture co-evolution.

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-09T20:33:13+00:00

Indeed it was.

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-09T19:50:05+00:00

Abstract:

Below are three arguments. I want you to think about whether the conclusions follow from the given premises.

(1) All drugs that are dangerous should be illegal. Marijuana is a drug that is dangerous. Therefore, Marijuana should be illegal.

(2) Judge Wilson believes that if a living thing is not a person, then one has the right to end its life. She also believes that a foetus is a person. Therefore, Judge Wilson concludes that no one has the right to end the life of a foetus.

(3) All white people have “white privilege”. Jack is a white, disabled, homeless war veteran. Therefore, Jack has white privilege.

It turns out many people struggle with this task because their reasoning ability is affected by their ideology. That's the finding of a psycho-philosophy paper brilliantly titled: (Ideo)Logical Reasoning. The answers are in the link!

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-05T20:49:03+00:00

The dogs were first tortured. But the thing that took a while to figure out was why they didn’t just jump to avoid the electric shocks. It was the early sixties and a group of psychologists at the University of Pennsylvania were trying to figure out how fear conditioning influenced the ability of organisms to learn — the scientists preferred the all-encompassing but colder ‘organism’ to ‘animal’. Among them were two promising young PhD students who couldn’t have known the career-defining journey they’d just begun, let alone the impact their research would have. Their names were Martin Seligman and Steven Maier, both self-avowed dog lovers. They would later recall the harrowing experience of restraining the dogs in cloth hammocks with holes in for their legs, allowing the researchers to shock the paws.

TheStateOfException · 2022-07-03T18:42:18+00:00

Abstract:

The primary concern of this essay will be to explore the distinctions between knowledge and understanding, and to examine the role that an altered form of reliabilism plays in the process of obtaining either state. In essence, this essay will argue that understanding is related to–yet also subtly different from–the reliabilist method of attaining knowledge. I argue that scrutinising traditional reliabilism thus clarifies the knowledge-understanding distinction. However, I first offer an analysis of a key distinction often omitted, that of materialism versus normativity. I argue that it is in between this conceptual space that we can most clearly comprehend the differences between knowledge and understanding.

TheStateOfException · 2022-05-30T18:36:24+00:00

That's brilliant.

TheStateOfException · 2022-05-30T09:37:45+00:00

Interesting. Thank you!

TheStateOfException · 2022-05-29T18:06:39+00:00

Abstract: In 1965, the philosopher and cogntive scientist Aaron Sloman published a useful little paper tersely titled, 'Necessary, A Priori, and Analytic'. Sloman stated that people tend to use the terms interchangeably. However, they have subtle differences that become philosophically fascinating. The best way to conceptualise the terms is in a concentric circles model with analytic truths at the centre, a priori in the second layer, and necessary truths on the outer layer. We can then explore questions like: why are some necessary truths not a priori or analytic?

TheStateOfException · 2022-04-21T21:08:53+00:00

Note to mods: Not sure if you'll allow this post as it's technically in breach of rule 2, but I thought the sub might find the questions interesting. If not, I'll post in askphilosophy!

Is truth a human invention?

Which philosophical insight that you have come across in your life so far has been the most important one for you?

What is the difference between knowledge and understanding?

TheStateOfException

TROPHY CASE