732 karma · joined October 2, 2015
So this looks like a case in point, where having a rough ideas of the production cost (some parts hand-made, made in France/Italy/England, expansive material like quality cashmere etc.) is important.
The production cost is one of the metrics customers use to decide if a price is fair or not, to them. There are other metrics, like the time that can be saved by using the product (ie. some way to quantify the product "use value"), but the production cost is often quite useful to detect abuses--and boy, aren't there a lot of attempts of such abuses.
Isn't it begging the question to parent's point?
A longer book is correlated, in the audience mind, with more content, more research done, more of an investment to read it hence more of a payoff ("it's a book you have to study"), and also more time spent reading it so potentially more pleasure, even for non-fiction.
Unfortunately, when you read a lot, these propositions start to become cons, and you'd often rather have just the meat--granted, not in a plastic plate, to run the culinary metaphor, but not with the three-hour ceremonial of the (would-be) fancy restaurant either.
Unless you know that everyone thinks they're 75th percentile, and then you can assume it's the deluded answer--and more likely, you're much closer to average. Eventually, this is not so much a question about intelligence, but self-awareness.
That's the problem with all these fallacies lists: things are a fallacy, except when they are not. So most often, they are just used as rhetoric weapons in verbal jousts.
Well, tracking my mother who doesn't know enough about ad-blockers or the implications of being tracked is already wrong, to me. Collecting detailed personal information on people for commercial purposes should be strictly regulated, at the very least when it's done automatically.
> That sends the message that you won’t support the model.
We should send the most effective and unambiguous kind of messages: I like that content, but not the ad/tracking that you put on your site. That's much clearer than not visiting the site altogether (they might think they just have to change their content, or their marketing or sth). Some media are not fully aware of the crap they run, because it's run by a third-party, and the decision was made by another department etc. I don't necessarily want to send a bad signal to everyone there.
If they can't make it, then it's no excuse to resort to creepy stuff like tracking and profiling people without their consent, or with them ignoring the extent or implications of it. It's nothing short of abusing people, and it being the last card not to get out of business is hardly an excuse.
You made a free mall analogy in another comment: if businesses can't run free mall without abusing customers, then don't run free malls; it's not like people always expected free malls, it's just that some companies began to offer products/content cheaper and cheaper, and now they hit rock-bottom. Whose fault is it? The customer for asking, or the businesses to enter a race to the bottom, and then going full unethical?
Again, I get your points, but don't track me, my friends or my family.
The thing is, Kahneman is likeable, he has a good reputation and books like these are pure candy for the audience who enjoy that kind of literature (myself included)--but that's also a good warning signal. Could it be too simple, too convenient and too satisfying to be true? How do you know when you fall in love with an idea/theory?
As a note aside, the xmlrpc endpoints of the aforementioned system worked fine and saved us time.
The System I/System II narrative is an old idea that can be quite convincing, and it's not without merits, but one might wonder if all its appeal doesn't call for a suggestion of the original post: watch if you are happy with a belief/theory.
It's not as much of a meme as fairly good heuristics. Most software has bugs, or depend on other pieces of software who have bugs. Most software can be improved or integrate with new technologies that weren't prevalent a few years ago. If software is good, it generally has a solid user base (relative to its target audience), and people will ask for tweaks and features--author can rightfully reject most of them, but it's a rare thing that absolutely none of them merits to be accepted.
So, when you discover a project that might be useful to you but you never heard of it and it's been inactive for years, I still believe it's quite a good rule of thumb to be leery before committing serious time and efforts to using it in anger. Which doesn't mean that counter-examples don't exist, naturally.