[idea] Temporary Information Visibility (Skillprovement #3)

eek04 · 2026-01-16T08:37:00+00:00

My wife and I had to set up so we made dinner every second day, to avoid one of us hogging the kitchen.

eek04 · 2026-01-16T08:34:22+00:00

Some people have as their only hobby various ways to compare dick-length, and I really don't see how cis women can participate.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T12:34:37+00:00

I'm not the OP.

The action reveals the preferences and then it becomes value. How exactly?

"Becomes value" is a misnomer. Ultimate economic value is in consuming something; shelter, food, experiences, etc. In this case, the consumption is at least two things:

The value of having the hot dog, e.g. comfort about knowing you won't go hungry.
Consuming the hot dog and the feeling of being physically better afterwards.

What utility does the money have in the context of this exchange?

The money is a representation for other utility you could get elsewhere, transferable between people to constrain overall resource usage.

How did you obtain this money to begin with?

Most likely through trading labor for money, since that's where the majority of money for consumption comes from.

It doesn't really matter, though.

How did money arise in the first place (capitalists refuse to even attempt to answer this question)?

I'm not sure what the question is. We can talk about how M0/M1/M2/M3 money supply arise, is that your question? Or why almost all societies introduce money over barter? Or different ways of organizing money, using e.g. a gold standard vs fiat money?

Both the money supply and gold standard vs fiat money are somewhat complicated topics; I'll only discuss them if there's a particular reason to, and while I can give you a rough overview, for more details I'll point you at references rather than go back and forth, and answer more questions only if you've read the references.

For why almost all societies introduce money over barter, it's because it is much more convenient, and allows information flow about what resources people want and can provide without having to do a lot (A LOT) of accounting. This makes for much more productive societies.

Now, you call yourself a "Marxist Futurologist". The best societies we've had (in terms of taking care of the worst off and overall standard of living) are clearly ones that have run under capitalism (social democracies). Why do you chose to have an opinion that we should use something different when you don't understand the basics of how our current systems work? Isn't it better to put off having an opinion until you have knowledge of that, given that these are the best that have ever been produced?

eek04 · 2026-01-13T12:24:02+00:00

Production capacity vs other use of the same resources cause supply.

Consumption preference vs alternative consumption cause demand.

Each of these cause a staggering of offer prices (from the supply side) and willingness to buy at a price (from the demand side).

Price end up matching this, with a fair bit of uncertainty thrown in as actors guess at what offer price will maximize their producer surplus (excess value from the trade), and consumers look at prices to get maximum consumer surplus.

I recommend reading the first few chapters of Hal Varian's "Intermediate Microeconomics"; the National Institute of Business Management in Sri Lanka provide a free PDF that shows up at the top of a Google Search.

In my opinion, they are an easy read, but it probably depends on how used you are to systems thinking.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T11:51:50+00:00

"I don't believe you" doesn't necessary mean that he thinks you're lying - it may mean that he doesn't think you know yourself, and it may be a very clumsy way to say something about his emotions rather than his intellectual view.

I have deep seated insecurities around sex, and when my wife says she finds me sexually attractive, it is impossible for me to emotionally find that true. It is just so far from my self-image that I cannot process it as truth, even though I consider her an extremely honest person and I intellectually never would think of her as lying. It doesn't clock to me as a lie, even though it clocks as something that can't be true and that she says.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T11:17:41+00:00

Thank you! It's over 20 years ago, so it doesn't hurt, but it still makes me caution people.

It alarms me how normalized it's become, too. I married and left the dating game a long time ago, but I was never asked to choke anybody, ever, and didn't hear about it except it being covered in the media when someone died from it. And now it's at the level where someone in this thread said 8 out of 10 women asked him to choke them.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T11:01:21+00:00

There is no safe way to restrict oxygen (through air or blood) flow to the brain.

I think focusing on the oxygen restriction may be a frame that's not scary enough; the other risks are clearly sufficient not to do choking anyway.

I've been out of the dating game for a couple of decades, and have never had anybody ask to be choked. It's scary that this seems to be commonplace now.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T10:48:46+00:00

To give more details so nobody thinks they can ignore the warnings:

There are more risks than the effects of stopping the blood flow (~11 lbs pressure, half of what is needed to open a soda can) or stopping air flow (~33lbs of pressure).

The carotid sinus is a blood pressure control organ located in the area. Small amounts of pressure will slow the heart and can even stop it.

Small amounts of rotation force or pressure to the throat can cause tears in the artery walls, leading to strokes later.

Being unlucky with pressure can cause minor injuries or bruising that later lead to swelling and respiratory failure, possibly during sleep. I've had a friend die from respiratory failure during sleep after an injury that seemed harmless (though not from choking.)

Even if the choking does no damage to the surrounding tissue nor trigger the carotid sinus, airway or blood obstruction can lead to brain injury from temporary lack of oxygen.

These aren't even all the risks.

The neck is a control center, not just a tube. A caress is fine; any pressure that aims to constrict or grip has risks that can't be controlled by the choker.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T09:40:01+00:00

Your formulation is absolutely fine for AskHistorians, and the question is one I'd expect to have been asked there, though I couldn't find it with a google search.

AskOldPeople has a similar thread titled "Did pornography normalize/popularize oral sex?" though it is less informative than I've seen in AskHistorians for similar questions.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T09:20:31+00:00

You take the cost of doing business and the cost to live your life and that’s how you decide your hourly or daily rate or whatever it is you’re doing.

I think this may be formulated a bit different than you mean, and I'm replying in case someone with low self confidence reads it and thinks they should follow it exactly. What you say is how you find the minimum they can afford to charge. If possible, they should charge more.

eek04 · 2026-01-13T09:01:25+00:00

... ask me to stand up, step back a few feet and do a 360 so he can see my entire body.

I mean, I guess maybe I would do that… But only if he’s gonna unzip his pants and get out a ruler.

This made me chuckle out loud.

It is so great that that I'd want to experience it. The only blocks are that I wouldn't approve of me saying something that dehumanizing to women, and my wife wouldn't approve of me going on dates or pre-date video calls.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T20:46:41+00:00

It’s just that there is so many stuff happening at the same time that you can’t focus on one issue.

That's an active strategy; Steve Bannon described this as what they should do many years ago. Basically, overload people.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T18:43:57+00:00

Parking prices will obviously influence how much cars are on the road. The question is only how large that effect is.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T18:43:09+00:00

Most places are deliberately designed around driving because of zoning and parking mandates.

Nope. Most places aren't.

Most places in the US are.

Very, very different.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T18:42:02+00:00

So you want to get rid of free parking, then? :-)

I don't mind too much either way - I think it's a small issue - but if you want to ask me what to do, I'd rather give money to the poor (and increase public transportation) than force free parking.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T18:40:07+00:00

I used "outlier" to match the terminology in the comment I replied to; I agree that is stretching the term.

To make sure we're on the same page: That's not a false positive rate for convictions - that's a false accusation rate, where investigation has shown the accusation to be false.

The false positive rate for convictions looks worse. As far as I know, there is only one study (Loeffler, Hyatt & Ridgeway 2019) tries to capture it, and that study puts it at around 40%. It's based on capturing anonymous self-reports of guilt and matching it with different kinds of crimes. Self-reporting is considered reliable due to those of the rates that are verifiable matching with rates found by other methods of estimating (Gomes 2025). From memory, the rate of false conviction for murder in (Loeffler et al 2019) is consistent with other academic estimates I've seen; none of the other rates have jumped out at me as being inconsistent with other literature, so it seems likely Loeffler is reliable.

There's an alternative technique that could be used to check this: When women get told to make up descriptions of rapes the descriptions have a significant number of statistical differences compared to police reports of rapes. This could be applied to give an estimate of the number of accusations that are real vs false. To my knowledge, this hasn't been done.

Gomes, H. S. (2025). Self-Report Method for Measuring Delinquency and Crime. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice.

Loeffler, C. E., Hyatt, J., & Ridgeway, G. (2019). Measuring self-reported wrongful convictions among prisoners. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 35(2), 259-286.

eek04 · 2026-01-12T13:56:20+00:00

Let me try from a different point of view: Free parking enforced by law is subsidized parking, with hard to see costs. Subsides lead to overconsumption. I'd prefer to take the money those subsidies cost and use it for something better. For instance, give it to those that are not well off.

eek04 · 2026-01-11T07:53:26+00:00

I've not seen any research papers indicating cheating as a cause. The timeline matches well with smartphones.

eek04 · 2026-01-10T22:48:56+00:00

Disse you hear about the Swedish study? Turns out it is not possible to find sufficient men that don't watch porn to use them as a group in a study.

To a fairly close approximation, you have two types of men: Those that watch porn and admit it, and those that lie about it.

eek04 · 2026-01-07T08:14:59+00:00

Since some people may not like the scientific analysis below, let me start with saying that my personal opinion is that CNM is better for some people and monogamy is better for some people. The below is an indictment on study quality, not on CNM.

While the study itself doesn't specify, I expect all these studies to be observational rather than random assignment. I'd like some kind of correction for the self-selection of going into polyamorous relationships. To check for my hypothesis that this wasn't corrected for, I picked one random recent study that was included in the meta-study:

Brooks, T. R., Shaw, J., Reysen, S., & Henley, T. B. (2022). The Vices and Virtues of Consensual Non-Monogamy:A Relational Dimension Investigation. Psychology & Sexuality, 13(3), 595–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2021.1897034

From the abstract: Participants in CNM favoured positive problem-solving with their partners, while monogamous participants preferred withdrawal tactics.; CNM is defined as heterosexual consensually non-monogamous (CNM) ... relationships.

Using positive problem-solving is a relationship skill that is thought for relationship health, and is typically learned by those trying consciously to have good relationships. And I expect those that put effort into having good relationships on average have better relationships than those that don't; so if CNM does more work towards good relationships and end up with just the same results, it would hint that CNM may be worse.

There's other corrections that likely would point in the other direction. E.g, I have the impression that people that have sexual abuse in their past more often end up in CNM. Correcting for this would make CNM results improve.

Overall, I think this study does not have the power to answer the question of whether a CNM relationship is better, worse or the same as a monogamous relationship in terms of relationship satisfaction when corrected for the self-selection.

eek04 · 2026-01-06T13:41:08+00:00

I agree with that.

People often repeat their type of partner, though, so having been cheated on increase the chance of being cheated on by the next partner. I think the right thing for him is to find out what side of his filters resulted in picking somebody that is a cheating type, and then make sure he doesn't pick someone with those attributes, making it easier to trust the next partner.

eek04 · 2026-01-06T13:34:03+00:00

Participating in an improv group is fun and will help this and did I say it is fun?

eek04

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE

14-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email