Activity Feed

  Dirk Meulenbelt commented on criticism #712.

Not a lawyer but reproducing the entire letter from Próspera ZEDE is presumably a violation of their copyright.

#712·Dennis HackethalOP revised over 1 year ago

I didn't know that. I figured linking to the tweet that posted it would be fine.

  Dirk Meulenbelt commented on idea #700.

I now see that the newsletter links to an explanation further down:

ZEDEs are SEZs in Honduras.

But that’s too late. May have already lost readers at that point.

#700·Dennis HackethalOP, over 1 year ago

How could I explain a term in the headline?

  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #711.

We will update you on news, events, and do longer form write-ups […]

‘longer-form’

[…] on the projects discussed in the talks, […]

You mentioned the talks in the previous sentence. Remove “discussed in the talks” and instead say ‘discussed projects’ or ‘projects that were discussed’.

as we now have many more news sources we didn’t yet know about.

Don’t explain yourself to your readers. Remove this part.

We will update you on news, events, and do longer form write-ups […]

‘longer-form’

[…] on the projects discussed in the talks, […]

You mentioned the talks in the previous sentence. Remove “discussed in the talks” and instead say ‘discussed projects’ or ‘projects that were discussed’.

[…] as we now have many more news sources we didn’t yet know about.

Don’t explain yourself to your readers. Remove this part.

  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #699.

Not a lawyer but reproducing the entire letter from Próspera Zede is presumably a violation of their copyright.

Not a lawyer but reproducing the entire letter from Próspera ZEDE is presumably a violation of their copyright.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #711.

We will update you on news, events, and do longer form write-ups […]

‘longer-form’

[…] on the projects discussed in the talks, […]

You mentioned the talks in the previous sentence. Remove “discussed in the talks” and instead say ‘discussed projects’ or ‘projects that were discussed’.

as we now have many more news sources we didn’t yet know about.

Don’t explain yourself to your readers. Remove this part.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #710.

In the coming period, expect us to pick up on many of the talks’ subject matter.

False possessive

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #709.

Zu- series of popup projects

That hyphen looks out of place.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #708.

The Honduran Supreme Court still needs to publish an explanatory addendum on the passed law to explain how (existing) ZEDEs will be dealt with after this ruling.

Passive voice hides accountability. Who will deal with ZEDEs? Use active voice accordingly.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #707.

Prospects for Próspera and other ZEDEs look dire and in a recent post […]

The alliteration threw me off a bit here. And if they’re dire they’re not really prospects. ‘Outlook’ might work better here.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #706.

lighter taxes and regulations

‘lower taxes and lighter regulations’ (I don’t think taxes can be ‘light’)

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #705.

achieved via allowing

‘by allowing’

  Dennis Hackethal revised idea #702 and marked it as a criticism.

legally possible

made […] legally possible

Just say ‘legalized’

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #701.

Related to #700:

ZEDEs are SEZs in Honduras.

What are SEZs?

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #698.

Honduran Supreme Court declares ZEDEs unconstitutional, putting Próspera and other ZEDEs in jeopardy.

Not everyone knows what a “ZEDE” is. Is it an acronym? What does it stand for?

#698·Dennis HackethalOP, over 1 year ago

I now see that the newsletter links to an explanation further down:

ZEDEs are SEZs in Honduras.

But that’s too late. May have already lost readers at that point.

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #699.

Not a lawyer but reproducing the entire letter from Próspera Zede is presumably a violation of their copyright.

  Dennis Hackethal started a discussion titled ‘Criticisms of ‘Based Brief’’.

One of the people running ‘Based Brief’ has requested criticism, specifically of their latest newsletter titled ‘Honduras rugpulls Próspera and other ZEDEs’. These criticisms aren’t meant to be exhaustive.

The discussion starts with idea #698.

Honduran Supreme Court declares ZEDEs unconstitutional, putting Próspera and other ZEDEs in jeopardy.

Not everyone knows what a “ZEDE” is. Is it an acronym? What does it stand for?

  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #670. The revision addresses idea #695.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been more correct if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been better if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

  Dennis Hackethal addressed criticism #670.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been more correct if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

#670·Dennis HackethalOP revised over 1 year ago

more correct

Something is either correct it isn’t. There is no “more” correct.

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #641.

I don’t think it’s “a lot like” doing science – the underlying logic is the same, science being just one particular instance of problem solving. This is then acknowledged in the subsequent sentence:

[...] Popper’s epistemology applies to all problem solving, not just to science.

So why mention science if you’re just going to generalize the restriction away regardless?

#641·Dennis HackethalOP, over 1 year ago

I just found this related Popper quote underscoring my point:

Truth is hard to come by. It needs both ingenuity in criticizing old theories, and ingenuity in the imaginative invention of new theories. This is so not only in the sciences, but in all fields.

Popper, Karl. The Myth of the Framework: In Defence of Science and Rationality (p. 44). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.
  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #668.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been clearer if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been more correct if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

  Dennis Hackethal revised idea #662 and marked it as a criticism.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been clearer if she had said it’s a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

Your subconscious is like a computer […]

She says “like” so the sentence is technically correct, but it would have been clearer if she had said the subconscious is a program (or an amalgamation of programs). What she’s presumably getting at here is that the subconscious is automatic like a computer and unlike the conscious, which can stop and reflect and criticize and so on.

  Dennis Hackethal revised idea #661.

Fix separating punctuation


Ayn Rand writes:

Your subconscious is like a computer—more complex a computer than men can build—and its main function is the integration of your ideas. Who programs it? Your conscious mind. If you default, if you don’t reach any firm convictions, your subconscious is programmed by chance—and you deliver yourself into the power of ideas you do not know you have accepted.

Ayn Rand writes:

Your subconscious is like a computer—more complex a computer than men can build—and its main function is the integration of your ideas. Who programs it? Your conscious mind. If you default, if you don’t reach any firm convictions, your subconscious is programmed by chance—and you deliver yourself into the power of ideas you do not know you have accepted.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #661.

Ayn Rand writes:

Your subconscious is like a computer—more complex a computer than men can build—and its main function is the integration of your ideas. Who programs it? Your conscious mind. If you default, if you don’t reach any firm convictions, your subconscious is programmed by chance—and you deliver yourself into the power of ideas you do not know you have accepted.

#661·Dennis HackethalOP, over 1 year ago

[…] your subconscious is programmed by chance […]

This sounds as if chance was the programmer. The word ‘randomly’ might have been better. But that presumably still isn’t quite what she meant; I think she meant something like ‘haphazardly’, with no clear direction, by uncritical integration, ie osmosis, of ideas from the surrounding culture, as I believe she put it elsewhere.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #661.

Ayn Rand writes:

Your subconscious is like a computer—more complex a computer than men can build—and its main function is the integration of your ideas. Who programs it? Your conscious mind. If you default, if you don’t reach any firm convictions, your subconscious is programmed by chance—and you deliver yourself into the power of ideas you do not know you have accepted.

#661·Dennis HackethalOP, over 1 year ago

[The] main function [of your subconscious] is the integration of your ideas.

Isn’t it the conscious mind that does the integrating, and then the subconscious stores the integrated ideas and executes them in applicable contexts?