tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post6863558883455230641..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: Two inevitable failuresGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-32297589777907987722015-01-14T04:33:09.846+01:002015-01-14T04:33:09.846+01:00Altruism (in a tit-for-tat feedback loop) is a sur...Altruism (in a tit-for-tat feedback loop) is a survival mechanism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr6lsTgZKAQ<br /><br />(Yeah, it's a popularized video, but the tit-for-tat game experiments I heard from other sources as well).Druur Monakhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17266766378798878053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-4394187258357307112014-12-31T20:28:04.113+01:002014-12-31T20:28:04.113+01:00Being neutral can be very good from a non-altruist...Being neutral can be very good from a non-altruistic PoV.<br /><br />It depends whether you think getting rich by helping people is altruistic ;) <br /><br />Just because you do not expect to get anything in return does not mean that you do not get anything<br /><br />Selling to both sides is definitely profitable, war is best for business when you are supplying both sides.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-9253246228921265862014-12-31T13:37:33.322+01:002014-12-31T13:37:33.322+01:00"Being neutral means being altruistic"
..."Being neutral means being altruistic"<br /><br />And after reading your blog for years I *still* fail to understand why altruism is a bad thing.<br /><br />Oh and being neutral doesn't automatically mean being altruistic. Being neutral means not taking either side.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-89446001433102373932014-12-31T11:05:47.558+01:002014-12-31T11:05:47.558+01:00"Being neutral means being altruistic."
..."Being neutral means being altruistic."<br /><br />That is, in general, nonsense. Your faction affiliation has nothing to do with whether you're being altruistic or not.<br /><br />For example: being neutral in a conflict can mean that you sell weapons to all sides alike, in order to maximize your own profits.<br /><br />"War is good for business" - Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #34Druur Monakhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07299435488090977357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-19448447493509205762014-12-31T06:09:59.540+01:002014-12-31T06:09:59.540+01:00At some point, Margaret Thatcher spoke about a ter...At some point, Margaret Thatcher spoke about a territory occupied by 150+ mill people that only 30 mill people are justified there.<br /><br />This was pretty disgusting. Your post somehow reminded me of that.<br /><br />In the end, the only real failure i see here is failure number "3" - she failed to attract people to her cause. Failures "1" and "2" are just rationalizations of that.<br /><br />Maybe it was impossible to attract people to her cause within Eve-verse. Like you said, Eve community is pretty rotten and also very pretentious in its rotten state.<br /><br />The conclusion about altruism i don't buy, though. Altruism within Eve can't work not because of some fundamental issue of altruism, but because Eve-verse is a rotten money-grubbin' self-entitled universe, which is only fun to pretend-be in.<br /><br />Altruism can only exist within a social structure where it is reciprocated in one way or another. Within that social structure, however, it can be highly effective as it eliminates a lot of transactional cost that egoism carries.<br /><br />Sugar didn't succeed in building that social structure in Molden Heath. Probably because, instead of looking for people who think similarly to herself and banding together, she tried to cater to the crapsack Eve-world.maximhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12576542229498004147noreply@blogger.com