|
|
|
|
|
|
by danso
3184 days ago
|
|
|
I assume you're being downvoted because you seem to have misread the author's statement and created a strawman argument. He posited that the financial system's algorithm's purpose is to answer, "what should we do?". You seem to have interpreted that as saying that the financial system should answer that problem for society as a whole. |
|
|
Yes, That is just re-stating what the author wrote, without providing any clarifying information.
> You seem to have interpreted that as saying that the financial system should answer that problem for society as a whole.
Maybe yes that is a maximalist interpretation; what is the alternative interpretation (it doesn't seem to be present in the author's text)?
> move away from min-sum towards sum-product (which often works an order of magnitude better) by perhaps implementing basic income. Etc. Etc.
Referencing 'basic income' here seems like a whole society problem to me, which has nothing to do with the technical implementation financial payment gateways, no?