|
RealityApologist posted:I've not done any of those things. The strongest argument this thread has right now is that I'm a bad writer, which hardly makes me a crank. Thank you. This thread has provided me with the most genuine laughs I've had all month.
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Sep 12, 2024 17:18 |
|
|
Wanamingo posted:I gave it a bit of consideration, and I honestly think that something like dogecoin would make a better currency than... whatever it is that RA's proposing here. Anybody disagree? You can pretty much take your pick of discredited and pernicious social, economic, and currency systems (anarcho-capitalism, absolutist monarchy, a wholesale return to the gold standard, etc.) and they'd all be more workable, popular and do less social harm than the clusterfuck that would result if anyone attempted to implement this scheme.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:"Looking pretty hard" =/= reading books, apparently. And without the information contained within those books, the most specific, precise and clearly articulated formalization of those economic systems possible would be useless to you because you would lack the required background knowledge to correctly contextualize and interpret what is being presented.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You are comparing a choice to gain an edge in a competitive sport versus a choice to regain a normal, functional life. No, the whole point of his original post was drawing a distinction between the two. I mean 95% of what he's written in the thread is (AFAIK) unintelligible garbage but his last few posts have been clear and on point in describing his worldview. He's just eliding a number of serious issues like the fact that shoe/cyborg discrimination isn't actually an issue for society, and that discriminating against some types of personal enhancement is perfectly appropriate and socially necessary/desirable- i.e. a Hanzo steel sword from glorious Nippon offers substantial enhancements to my personal capabilities in the abstract, but people would react poorly to me carrying one around for very good reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:But everyone is coupled to TUA, so they all share it's fate. If someone trashes TUA it effects everyone personally. tragedyofthecommons.txt edit: Seriously there is a lot of incredibly basic literature on public goods that you should probably read before posting about this stuff. Also, just some experience with how actual human beings behave in general. LGD fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Adar posted:Guys it's okay if my system allows me to scam people for a billion strangecoins just once because no one will trade with me and my billion strangecoins ever again. Also the invisible hand of the free market something something Look, I think its perfectly obvious that humans will naturally respond to a system where any amount of fame inherently causes an exponential increase in economic power with unilateral decisions to reduce that economic power so as to provide a small abstract boost to a fund that apparently barely subsidizes some level of universal welfare. This jives with observed behavior and (even leaving aside all of the exploitable opportunities for collusion) would definitely not provide incentive for socially destructive attention whoring by the worst people imaginable on a heretofore unseen scale.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Adar posted:Strangecoin: in the land of the rational actors, the non-linear thinker is king Lets be real here- Homo Economicus is a nearly infinitely better model of human behavior than what is being assumed here. It at least jives a little with some observable behaviors.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Adar posted:We're talking about an "economic system" that presupposes that large wealth transfers are unimportant because in the long run access to massive amounts of capital does not compensate for difficulty of future transactions. Honestly at this point the complete lack of any knowledge relating to economic theory isn't bothering me as much as the thoroughly disturbing lack of insight into how humans actually behave in day to day life, especially from someone who has ostensibly dedicated much of his life to the humanities.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Little Blackfly posted:He just said agricultural techniques from 10,000 years a go are "a form of science" so my guess would be no. I mean those techniques could have been science if they were taught to our ancestors by the ancient aliens. Just, you know, alien science. And not something that actually happened or could happen. Still, that "theory" probably has more basic plausibility and evidence behind it than Strangecoin currently does. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Before I decide whether or not to take this seriously: How out of control is your hairdo right now? Extremely. I'm like a month overdue for a haircut and I just got out of the shower.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Time to drop some science on this thread. I'm going to use RealityApologist's level of background knowledge of subjects that aren't "Digital Philosophy" as my starting point, and his usual level of scientific rigor in conducting my experiment. Observation: The sun is makes it light during the day, and it becomes dark when the sun goes away at night, which scares me. The sun provides warmth and comfort. Question: Is the sun a powerful god? Hypothesis: A powerful god would protect us from predators at night and provide comfort for us, but would be too glorious for the eyes of mortal men to behold directly. Experiment: I tried to stare directly at the sun, but it hurt my eyes and I could not do it. Conclusion: The sun is a powerful god and we should fear it. God is real ya'll. LGD fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Apr 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:The sun doesn't protect us from predators at night, fire does. Your hypothesis is flawed, Fire is the true god. poo poo you're right. My bad. What if we considered a system where fires were the sons and daughters of god that stay with us in the darkness? Just spit-balling here.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Again, the majority of points that have been made have been about your incoherent ideas, not your psychological character. This is a true thing that anyone can see by reading the thread, so it's really weird for you to construct this fantasy where things are otherwise. Nobody but you believes it. And to the degree that the thread has focused on your psychological character, it's because it is something like the only constant available in this discussion. Everything else is so amorphous that it's difficult to discuss extensively, except pointing out where things you've written don't jive with knowledge and theory scattered across several fields. When this is done it turns out that either we misinterpreted what you meant or it is a problem (that we need to address for you) and then that issue will be subsequently ignored. And "conversational charity" only stretches so far- a number of things that have happened in this thread make it extremely difficult not to bring up issues of your personal character- i.e. the linearity discussion, the fact that you thought you won the linearity discussion, direct comparison of yourself to revolutionary figures of science followed by immediate claims that you clearly didn't mean to imply the obvious inference, inability to use common definitions of terms, etc. I think everyone would prefer if this discussion wasn't about you in any real sense, but there would need to be something reasonably concrete to debate first. We seem to be debating a half-formed idea that only exists in your head and that makes it extremely hard to discuss without bringing your person into it. If the thread had a concrete goal like "hey can anybody formalize Whuffies?" then it would be a different matter (and a much shorter thread). LGD fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Apr 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:People don't deserve unqualified access to their tools. I mention several cases (mostly involving weapons) where it's entirely reasonable to restrict access to tools. Given that military impersonation is primarily dangerous because of the access to weapons of war, this would surely fall under that same analysis. Actually access to weapons is not the major danger with impersonation of authority figures- I'm thinking more police than military impersonators here, but I think it holds true. And if weapons are problematic because they provide access to enhanced capabilities to violate another's rights, does not the same apply to something like Google Glass and expectations of privacy? I picked a katana rather than a gun in the original example for a reason- because it's an ostentatious and unneeded tool that would currently serve largely as a marker of tribal identity for a privileged section of the populace. A user's capabilities are enhanced and they may very well present no danger to anyone at all, but it hardly seems like a social problem for someone who insists on using such a tool in most settings to be ostracized. edit: vvvvvvvvvvvv BernieLomax posted:You mention SC as if is super-obvious what that is. Supreme Court. As in the Supreme Court decision mentioned earlier in this conversational thread. From context it is pretty obvious man. 
LGD fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Apr 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
The Milk-Woman and Her Pail A farmer's daughter was carrying her Pail of milk from the field to the farmhouse, when she fell a-musing. "The money for which this milk will be sold, will buy at least three hundred eggs. The eggs, allowing for all mishaps, will produce two hundred and fifty chickens. The chickens will become ready for the market when poultry will fetch the highest price, so that by the end of the year I shall have money enough from my share to buy a new gown. In this dress I will go to the Christmas parties, where all the young fellows will propose to me, but I will toss my head and refuse them every one." At this moment she tossed her head in unison with her thoughts, when down fell the milk pail to the ground, and all her imaginary schemes perished in a moment. The Astronomer An astronomer used to go out at night to observe the stars. One evening, as he wandered through the suburbs with his whole attention fixed on the sky, he fell accidentally into a deep well. While he lamented and bewailed his sores and bruises, and cried loudly for help, a neighbor ran to the well, and learning what had happened said: "Hark ye, old fellow, why, in striving to pry into what is in heaven, do you not manage to see what is on earth?' The Seaside Travelers Some Travelers, journeying along the seashore, climbed to the summit of a tall cliff, and looking over the sea, saw in the distance what they thought was a large ship. They waited in the hope of seeing it enter the harbor, but as the object on which they looked was driven nearer to shore by the wind, they found that it could at the most be a small boat, and not a ship. When however it reached the beach, they discovered that it was only a large human being of sticks, and one of them said to his companions, "We have waited for no purpose, for after all there is nothing to see but a load of wood." Our mere anticipations of life outrun its realities. The Thirsty Pigeon A Pigeon, oppressed by excessive thirst, saw a goblet of water painted on a signboard. Not supposing it to be only a picture, she flew towards it with a loud whir and unwittingly dashed against the signboard, jarring herself terribly. Having broken her wings by the blow, she fell to the ground, and was caught by one of the bystanders. Zeal should not outrun discretion. The Vain Jackdaw Jupiter determined, it is said, to create a sovereign over the birds, and made proclamation that on a certain day they should all present themselves before him, when he would himself choose the most beautiful among them to be king. The Jackdaw, knowing his own ugliness, searched through the woods and fields, and collected the feathers which had fallen from the wings of his companions, and stuck them in all parts of his body, hoping thereby to make himself the most beautiful of all. When the appointed day arrived, and the birds had assembled before Jupiter, the Jackdaw also made his appearance in his many feathered finery. But when Jupiter proposed to make him king because of the beauty of his plumage, the birds indignantly protested, and each plucked from him his own feathers, leaving the Jackdaw nothing but a Jackdaw.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:You misunderstood the argument, because I explicitly denied this. I'm not saying people can unravel arbitrarily complex systems, I'm saying that can unravel systems that are suited to their dispositions. Facial recognition isn't an arbitrarily complex issue. It's complex in a very specific way to which our brains are highly adapted. Except that your system formalizes those things, and this thread is the very opposite of convincing evidence that you even have an inkling of how to go about doing something like that. What you're proposing isn't a natural evolution of the social sorting and tracking people do intuitively all the time- it's requiring those interactions and all economic exchanges to operate through an unworkable crackpot system that you haven't even begun to flesh out. People's ability to track their relative social status isn't going to do you a bit of good in making your proposed system less terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:That's fair enough. I've given a proposal designed explicitly to help me learn how to do it, in a framework that general and works according to principles I find agreeable. I'd like to be able to study how this structure I've proposed works, but I don't know how to do that on my own and don't have the resources to attempt it in a reasonable timeframe without the help of others. Which is why I come here to talk about it. quote:I think the second one is false. I think an internet comedy forum is a perfectly fine place to entertain such a proposal, especially since its members are both familiar with the idea and capable of insightful analysis from a perspective I find generally agreeable. I don't think there's anything messianic about the Strangecoin proposal, or even all that radical; its just a twist on the general altcurrency meme that is being replicated like mad at the moment. Again, you don't know enough about economics to have an inkling of what you're missing. quote:The implication of the thread's second opinion above is that only a messiah (that world changing genius) could successfully propose the sort of theory that I've proposed and have a shot of it working, and since I'm obviously not such a person then there's no hope for my proposal. The idea is that you don't have to weigh the merits of the proposal itself (which you couldn't do anyway), but instead you only need to weigh the merits of the person offering the proposal, and the thread consensus about that person, and that's enough to address whatever proposals may come. Be sure to add a confirmation bias, so that any mistakes incidental to the proposal are considered themselves refutations of the proposal. What you do have is a thread where you commit multiple verbal gaffes that allude to considering yourself a genius. Your mockery is unfortunately well earned.
LGD fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
grate deceiver posted:drat, son. For 300 eggs per pail, that has to be some bomb-rear end milk she got there. I think it's supposed to be part of the joke, but it is worth pointing out that the eggs we eat today are huge compared to what was produced historically. Apparently old English country recipes are difficult to re-create today because they will do things like call for 30 eggs at a time. And assume you have domestic help around to whip them by hand for over an hour (which supposedly does create some sort of qualitative difference).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Edit: Psychohistory holy poo poo. BernieLomax posted:I feel the metaphore would be slightly closer if slightly modified: I think he's rather is making an attempt at developing psychohistory knowing full and well that he is going to fail. And the model could, after testing, become a sort of metric on how to measure other, possibly better, models. I could be off-base here, but that's what I think he's saying? At least he isn't saying that he has found any underlying pattern of human behaviour and economy nor found a perfect economic model. Sorry, I possibly should have been clearer- I didn't mean to imply that Strangecoin would be anywhere near as useful as a working theory of Psychohistory, nor that RealityApologist is attempting to do anything so noble. I just feel that the difficulty level of formalizing either project is likely to be fairly similar. And since RealityApologist isn't the premier mathematician of a galaxy-spanning civilization assisted by an immortal android companion...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:There can't be a working theory of psychohistory, it's pseudoscience. I am aware of that. edit: And I was using the term in the sense it is used in the Foundation Novels, not the crazy stuff detailed in that Wikipedia article. i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_(fictional) NOT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory LGD fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:The claim is not that we understand humans better in the sense that we can predict with greater accuracy what they will or won't do. Ok. Lets say we grant all of this (which we absolutely shouldn't). Do you think that this is an argument in favor of your proposal? Because the general consensus seems to be that it is completely unworkable bullshit for a whole host of reasons, many having to do with impressions and learned experience about the way actual people inter-relate. Shouldn't that strike you as strong evidence that you should consider major, radical, revisions to your proposal (whatever it actually is) rather than mere tinkering around the edges?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:One thing to speak in its favor is that Strangecoin is extremely hostile to the notion of "private property". This connects back to the discussion of corporations earlier in the thread: Strangecoin gives an effective way of piercing the corporate veil by quantifying explicitly an individual's contributions to collective action. So in some sense, there is no private property in strangecoin world: everything is collectively owned. That gives at least some incentive to not unilaterally inhibit the jews; it hurts TUA and so it hurts us too. That doesn't protect the Jews against the inhumanity of man, of course, but that's a distinct kind of incentive that other kinds of socioeconomic networks. See: the digital values. I think literally everything in this is either something that has been previously mentioned never despite having huge implications (abolition of private property) or has already been dealt with to the degree anything in strangecoinland can actually be addressed- i.e. TUA is completely superfluous to the system you specified and even if it exists as an accounting identity provides no constraints on or incentives for participants in the system. You are literally making up bullshit as you go along. And again, if you think we can discuss this because humans are inherently good at evaluating social systems, why does the fact that most actual humans are telling you your ideas are bad not seem to make an impression on you?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Here's a question for you RealityApologist- is strangecoin more "extremely hostile" to the notion of private property, or the notion of strangecoin itself? Because private property serves all kinds of useful social functions, not the least of which is that people like knowing they have ownership of small prized personal possessions. Strangecoin appears to serve no social function not better handled by existing ways of doing things beyond possibly allowing borderline autists to make pretty graphs, and is totally poo poo at serving as a medium of exchange. If strangecoin were implemented instantly from on high (even in a post-scarcity society), do you think people would have more incentive to go along with its constant demands to track and quantify every interpersonal relationship so that they could buy (but not really buy) things depending on how closely they could cozy up to the biggest attention whores imaginable, or do you think they would be given a very strong incentive to switch over immediately to bartering goods and services so that they could acquire things that they value? Because strangecoins have and vary in "value" (to the degree they have value at all) in arcane and unpredictable ways. But my Ninja Turtles slammer has relatively consistent and anticipable value to me, and so do Jimmy's best pogs. LGD fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Apr 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:You are being far too generous to the goons. On the contrary, you're being far too generous with yourself. D&D has given you a much fairer hearing than you'd receive in nearly any other venue. It gets to be slightly less polite because it isn't worried that the young man in front of them might do something violent because he isn't making sense and appears to be showing signs of disordered thinking. But you get to pick and choose your responses in a way that you wouldn't quite be able to face to face.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Instead of writing a 1000-word response to this gaping hole in your proposal, you should immediately stop writing anything and go find a copy of "The Dispossessed" by Ursula Le Guin. It is an amazing piece of fiction that is infinitely more interesting, nuanced, well-written and researched than anything you've posted in this thread. I'm sure you'd find it interesting. If by some chance you actually read it and come away with no thought besides 'hey that sounds an awful lot like StrangeCoin!' and start citing it in future ramblings I will probably cry. If by another chance you have already read it then how did you learn nothing from it? Or, honestly, just start writing science fiction. I mean read LeGuin and others obviously, but strongly consider writing some of your own. It would probably force you to think about how your ideas would look, feel and function if actually implemented and it might allow you to render them in a form that is more approachable and palatable for other people. I mean I don't have particularly high hopes personally, but if you approached it seriously I think it very probably is the best way for you to develop your thoughts and present them in a manner that doesn't invite immediate derision. It also seems like among the better things you can realistically do with a graduate degree in "Digital Philosophy" (without moving to an unrelated field).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:I'm not bothered by it, or I wouldn't be here. But it makes the conversation much more difficult than it would be otherwise, and the standards demanded of my posting are that much higher. No. You would likely need to be a genius with an excellent founding in multiple disciplines to have a chance of succeeding in having a good idea. You certainly don't need to be a genius to consider such issues and ideas. Everybody in this thread has already done so- we considered the specific ideas you put forward and found them to be unmitigated garbage. You shouldn't be ashamed of thinking about such things, and if you want to create a thread where people huff farts and talk about possible systems for post-scarcity economics then so be it. But this isn't that thread, and the notion that the first half-baked idea you came up with is actually going to be a good means of radically revising all human social and organizational systems is spectacular hubris that should provoke equally spectacular feelings of shame.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
BernieLomax posted:So, do you think that "This is a comedy forum" is a good excuse for making fun of Eripsa? Eripsa's ideas (to the extent they are fully discernible) are self-evidently worthy of dismissal and ridicule. Eripsa himself hits so many buffoonish notes that I'd be tempted to conclude his persona was an online performance art piece dedicated to creating a figure of fun (similar to TobleroneTriangular) if it weren't so apparent that he's in deadly earnest. This earnestness does engender a certain amount of genuine sympathy and actual good advice, but it doesn't change the fact that he exhibits characteristics that make him a nearly ideal and well-justified target for mockery. I can elaborate on those characteristics (and did at some length before I deleted it) but I think most people who read this thread can figure out what they are and I'd rather not bum him out too bad or come across as so hostile he tunes me out entirely. I really hope taking a few days off to have fun and get his head clear will provide an opportunity for some needed self-reflection. And really, if you are going to make fun of someone, is there a more appropriate vehicle than a comedy forum?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:This is wishful thinking on par with Eripa-posting in general. He's been doing this for years now. After being banned in the second attention economy thread for the sort of aggrieved "You guys aren't getting it, feh, typical" sort of bluster on display now, he later tried to sneak back under the guise of a new persona for more "discussion" and was pretty quickly recognized due to how characteristic his idiosyncrasies are. That he demands a greater spirit of charity from the forums after not having changed one whit and earning every bit of scorn is laughable, to say the least. When he insists that this is one of the best venues for critiquing and improving his ideas, I think that really speaks lowly of the quality of those ideas that we're the best hes able to find when you consider how every one of these threads plays out. Hes miffed about the response he gets and his own reputation without ever stopping to consider that he earned it all on his own. This doesn't deserve any more patience than hes getting, and frankly posters like Jawn seem saint-like in what they're willing to put up with. Oh he deserves less charity than he's gotten for sure, and I know I'm probably being unreasonably charitable now. It's just that the notion he's truly incapable of engaging in any sort of genuine self-reflection is making me unusually sad today. I don't know, maybe it's the contrast to the nice spring weather. And sometimes things strike people in a funny way and they'll change from what is apparently a fixed set of behavior. I want to be optimistic. On the other hand there is the post he just made, as well as all of his posting before that, so yeah I should probably just take a loving hint, huh?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Kjoery posted:I thought nodes were supposed to represent distinct, individual human beings? Wasn't that kinda the point? To keep things simple? They were, and having them potentially allows for interesting hijinks depending on whatever implementation of Strangecoin is being handwaved into existence this time. It also isn't clear why international supply chains suddenly become "salient" to me beyond my ability to more easily trace them if I really cared to do so. The impact of any individual's relation to the corporate structure would be negligable so I probably don't have any actual reason to give a gently caress about people further up the line so long as I get my cheap electronics. The same effect could be achieved via simply mandating that all business accounting be a matter of public record. The inherent differences in valuation of strangecoin currency are also highly likely to have perverse economic incentives depending on how these corporate structures are implemented- for example I can easily envision scenarios where belonging to and buying exclusively from megacorporations is really the only way of doing things because of their massive inherent advantages in terms of maintaining network centrality. Not that that should be at all unexpected since Strangecoin's only consistent features are perverse economic incentives and a corresponding tendency towards creating dystopian hellholes. LGD fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Apr 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Badera posted:Yeah, that's what I've been thinking the entire time, I just couldn't decipher the word salad enough to confirm it. RA, are you a libertarian? This may not be a popular position to take in D&D but I really feel you're being grossly, grossly unfair to libertarians here. For all the eminently reasonable objects to their worldview and philosophy you have to admit that their understanding of economics, social systems and human behavior is more comprehensive and accurate than Eripsa's, and their ideas, if fully implemented, would do less harm and result in a better society than any version of Strangecoin proposed thus far.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Krotera posted:I'll admit I've stopped trying to untangle his posts: in general I'll say he comes off as pretty blustery and stream-of-consciousness. Keeping up with him is a pretty significant chore even though I'd say I'm usually alright at following an argument. You really shouldn't. He has a long history of disingenuous crankishness that should justifiably cause anyone familiar with him to regard any new ideas (or "new" "ideas") of his with a large degree of skepticism. It's also generally an author's responsibility to ensure that he can make his ideas understood by his intended audience, and Eripsa's complete inability to articulate his ideas in an intelligible manner is a failure on his part, not on yours.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
midnightclimax posted:Haha what the gently caress. So the idea's not even his? Was that mentioned at any point? That just makes me sad now. It came up a few times in passing. I think it was glossed over both because there isn't really a good reason for most people to know what Whuffies are, and because any perceived lack of originality is among the very least of Strangecoin's problems.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Sep 12, 2024 17:18 |
|
|
jre posted:Can anyone spot the slight flaw in this example? Is it that the example presumes universal adoption while simultaneously presuming that the doctor is beyond the reach of the network? Or is it that it completely ignores alternate means of information transfer (including things like "people talking to one another" and "the 'press' is a major factor in disseminating information to the masses") and is basically a white paper exploring the ways in which Synero can replicate the functionality of an electronic mailing list?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 23:42
|
|