In my experience, people thinking badly about me isn’t upstream of the social punishment of losing resources, people thinking badly of me IS the social punishment.
Evolutionarily speaking I would guess that worrying about what people think of me is important in order to allow me to get resources but my emotions are implemented on the social level, not the resource level.
(E.g. I don’t know any LWers IRL and will get very little resource from them but it would still feel bad if people had a bad opinion of me)
The Co-Op’s purchase of Somerfield (£1.57b) would seem like an interesting case study - why did they decide to go ahead with this? Did it actually benefit staff in the long run?
Yeah, I think that clarifies my thoughts - IMO using the word purpose is not ok in these other perspectives unless you actually mean a person had that purpose. it brings in connotations that someone has this purpose for which we then assign moral blame when the real question may be competence. And then, when there is moral blame, separating that from a competence issue is harder.
Much better IMO to say “this system isn’t achieving its purpose” than to say “this system has this other purpose” unless that’s what you mean - you are claiming that some designer(s) have this other purpose.
I’m not familiar specifically with HSR but my guess is that there are multiple purposes from multiple people. Some designers have the purpose to improve transport links, some want a big project to make their name and some want a jobs program. Systems can have multiple purposes and trying to narrow it down to a single one oversimplifies things.
I don’t think this works for general systems. For POSIWID the purpose of a car is to to get you for A to B. I don’t think POSIWIR returns a result - cars aren’t rewarded.
Having said that, I do think it’s much more interesting than POSIWID and, for human systems, more likely to yield sensible answers.
My take would be that purpose comes from conscious minds - the purpose of a system is what the designer intends. This is true even if the designer is rubbish at their job and their system doesn’t achieve the purpose they intend. When we don’t know what the designer intends we try to work it out by looking at what the system does or what it rewards.
This declares by fiat that non-engineered systems have no purpose but I think I’m ok with that. The purpose of a rabbit is not to make baby rabbits - rabbits just are. Saying rabbits have a purpose is to anthropomorphise evolution.
Quick note that I can't open the webpage via my institution (same issue on multiple browsers). Their restrictions can be quite annoying and get triggered alot. I can view it myself easily enough on phone but if you want this to get out beware trivial inconveniences and all that...
Firefox message is below.
Secure Connection Failed
An error occurred during a connection to ifanyonebuildsit.com. Cannot communicate securely with peer: no common encryption algorithm(s).
Error code: SSL_ERROR_NO_CYPHER_OVERLAP
- The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
- Please contact the web site owners to inform them of this problem.
Do dragon unbelievers accept this stance? My impression is that dragon agnosticism would often be considered almost as bad as dragon belief.
I’m confused as to how the fits in with UK politics. I don’t think the minority party has any kind of veto?
I guess we have the House of Lords but this doesn’t really have a veto (at least not long term) and the House of Commons and House of Lords aren’t always or even usually controlled by different factions.
1One extra thing to consider financially is if you have a smart meter then you can get all of your hot water and a chunk of your heating done at off peak rates. Our off peak electricity rates are about equal per kWh to gas rates.
Without this I think our system would be roughly the same cost per year as gas or slightly more, with it we save £200 per year or so I think. (This would be a very long payback time but there was a fully funded scheme we used).
If it helps anyone we are in Scotland and get average COP=2.9
In the UK there is a non-binding but generally observed rule that speed cameras allow you to drive 10% + 2mph above the speed limit(e.g. 35mph in a 30mph zone) before they activate.
This is a bit more of a fudge but better than nothing.
One of my favourite LW post types is “something that I had a vague sense of being identified and fleshed out”
This is a great example of that.