In managerial economics, economists examine the issue of psychic costs and benefits.[1] An example of a psychic cost is the guilt that a US-restaurant-goer feels if they do not make a voluntary tip to a waiter. There is no requirement for the client to give the tip, but if they do not, they may feel bad when they leave; to avoid this psychic cost, people are inclined to tip, even if the service was sub-standard. On the other hand, a psychic benefit occurs when one of the rewards of an action or choice are non-monetary.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_cost
Is openledger a bitshares product or is it a CCEDK product?
I believe CCEDK can do whatever they want with openledger, if I understand this correctly.
I personally would love to see gambling done using bitshares. It would not have to come directly from bitshares or course. Anyone could do this. It could even be added as an FBA type core feature if need be, and any Chinese wallet or otherwise could simply disable the function in there wallet/business offering, if it doesn't suit their needs.
I believe there should be no disallowed functions for bitshares at the core. Services built on top of the core can simply block access to them if they don't need/want them.
Is openledger a bitshares product or is it a CCEDK product?
I believe CCEDK can do whatever they want with openledger, if I understand this correctly.
I personally would love to see gambling done using bitshares. It would not have to come directly from bitshares or course. Anyone could do this. It could even be added as an FBA type core feature if need be, and any Chinese wallet or otherwise could simply disable the function in there wallet/business offering, if it doesn't suit their needs.
I believe there should be no disallowed functions for bitshares at the core. Services built on top of the core can simply block access to them if they don't need/want them.
I never said it should be allowed or disallowed. I said having it on the Bitshares blockchain raises psychic costs for no psychic or financial benefit. Bitshares doesn't need gambling just like I was told a while back that it didn't need drugs.
If you're willing to put in a gambling feature, drugs are going to be next, and how would Americans feel about cannabis and other pot related features built into the main interface?
The point here is you want to lower psychic costs in your interface. You don't want to directly associate Bitshares with anything which can unnecessarily raise psychic costs because just having Bitshares exist at all is controversial, and Bitshares cannot afford to create unnecessary psychic costs.
If someone wants to gamble, the BitsharesPlay blockchain should work just fine. You could put the BitAsset on the Bitshares chain as well. I do not think Bitshares as a network should accept a profit from gambling as that would bring psychic costs on all holders of Bitshares.
Consider the costs vs the benefits, and find the way of doing it which has the least cost and most benefit. Also don't just think about what you want, as you're a very small demographic.
I'm ok with gambling and I'm ok with the open market as well, including drugs. Not necessarily for my own preference or use, but free peaceful people can do what they want with themselves and their money. What business is it of mine. Also I'd say a majority of Americans are against the drug war so I'm not really concerned there either. The concern is how a very select, very powerful few would feel about it. Its ultimately none of their business either, of course, and ideally there's nothing they can do to stop it.
I never said anything about govern. What I was talking about is interface and feature design. The interface and features have to be aware of the fact that certain demographics of people with certain sensibilities run the parts of society which are in the position to crack down on these technologies.
I think its easy, because bitshares is so small, to see this group of people on the forum or wherever as the "community", but thats not really the case. As bitshares becomes bigger, it will be less and less the case. So each individual, or small group, a buisness, or development team, should consider these psychic cost to whatever they are doing. But as a "community" (that includes the entire field of bitshares users) is impossible and undesirable to govern in this way.
No one mentioned limiting anything. Specialize different chains for different experiments and audiences. But in any chain you should at least be aware of the psychic costs of any feature or implementation of any feature. When you implement it, you have to do it in a way which minimizes psychic costs, so you cannot do it in a really stupid inflammatory way, meaning you don't have to give authoritarians the middle finger to solve a problem.
If we start limiting ourselves based on this nations culture or that nations laws. There will be very little left we are able to do, that is not already being done. Laws can also be changed, so if the core is subject to some nations law, we're quickly losing the benefits of being decentralized in the first place.
The principle of liberty is the core. Each user can decide what to do with it. Each business can decide how they use it, and what functions are available to their users.Most people don't even know what liberty is. People who believe in censorship, who don't think for themselves, who rely on moral authorities, of course they'll be more concerned about how they look using Bitshares than abstract principle. How does it look if I'm caught using Bitshares, the anarchist drug gambling hacker nerd looking app? That psychic cost is enough to keep millions of people away. You have to lower those costs without sacrificing capabilities, and Linux did it, Bittorrent did it, TCP/IP did it, Facebook and Twitter did it, and all have been used in revolutions, for all sorts of purposes, yet because of the psychic benefits of them all, they ultimately get used.
Its the same argument that a USD dollar can be use for anything, taboo or otherwise. its the individual or buisiness that determines what they are willing to risk in psychic cost, with how they use the USD.
I agree with your points about psychic costs etc, but only as they apply to individual businesses particular offerings to the market built on top or alongside of bitshares. And those cases can make there own determinations and decisions. I don't think bitshares core should worry too much about it. As it is now, Bitshares can be used as a marketplace for buying and selling drugs, it wouldn't require any changes or additions to the core code, and there's nothing we can do to stop them from doing this.
Someone just has to build that website. I don't think this reflects poorly on bitshares, and would be a waste of time to try and stop.No one said stop anything because it's not the role of developers or of us to try to stop anything. The point is it is the role of developers to design an interface, and features, and those features have to minimize psychic costs.
Because something is psychicly taboo in the US or Chile shouldn't govern the limits of a global, non-national system at its core.
Sorry for all the words, I think i repeated myself a couple times : ) and was more long winded then necessary.
Is openledger a bitshares product or is it a CCEDK product?#sharebits “Xeldal“ 1 CHATEAUX
I believe CCEDK can do whatever they want with openledger, if I understand this correctly.
I personally would love to see gambling done using bitshares. It would not have to come directly from bitshares or course. Anyone could do this. It could even be added as an FBA type core feature if need be, and any Chinese wallet or otherwise could simply disable the function in there wallet/business offering, if it doesn't suit their needs.
I believe there should be no disallowed functions for bitshares at the core. Services built on top of the core can simply block access to them if they don't need/want them.