Strange7 comments on To signal effectively, use a non-human, non-stoppable enforcer - LessWrong

31 Post author: Clippy 22 May 2010 10:03PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (164)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Strange7 27 June 2011 07:46:49PM 1 point [-]

I'm saying that dropping something simple, reliable, and well-understood, but not mathematically infallible (like natural law), into an economic system containing billions of humans-as-we-know-them is like dropping wounded livestock into shark-infested waters. Every attempt at corruption successfully repelled makes people more confident in it, and therefore increases the potential rewards for a successful attempt; the existence of irrationally overconfident people means that attempts will continue, and greater rewards mean those attempts will be backed by commensurately greater resources.

Comment author: MatthewBaker 29 June 2011 06:40:10PM 1 point [-]

I understand now :) Do you think you can say the same thing about the regulators of our current economic system?

Comment author: Strange7 01 July 2011 06:36:57PM 3 points [-]

I could, but why bother? Others have said it better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

Comment author: MatthewBaker 01 July 2011 08:07:38PM 3 points [-]

Thank you for taking the time to change my mind good sir.

Comment author: Strange7 01 July 2011 08:46:22PM 1 point [-]

You're quite welcome. Thank you for going along willingly, rather than needing to be dragged!