eouw0o83hf

Ah rats, at first I thought maybe Hofstadter wrote a sequel

I really liked this paper. I think it's less of an outright joke that it's possible to squint your eyes and laugh that happiness could be a disorder, and more of shining a light on the psychopathological system that tends towards over-diagnosis and hyperfixation on those diagnoses.

"If our so-called scientific system were really objective and honest, it would include happiness as a disorder." I think this is the goal the paper is trying to expose, more than just making a joke about mapping a good feeling to a description of a bad feeling. Indeed, I think the last line of the paper gives it away - our current system is very incomplete and needs to be extended:

> Indeed, only a psychopathology that openly declares the relevance of values to classification could persist in excluding happiness from the psychiatric disorders.

A billion dollars fixes less every year due to inflation. Wouldn't we expect this to be the case most years?

The Chernobyl complex still houses a key power distribution center for the Ukrainian power grid, so it does hold strategic/logistical importance.

It most definitely does require a base trust - however that's not an argument against the solution, just a challenge to implementation.

We implicitly trust a tremendous amount of digitized information because we trust its sources - for instance, digital banking works because we trust banks to only log verified transactions to our account. Sourcing that information is absolutely very difficult, but it doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done.

If the government's records were up-to-date and perfect, the title industry wouldn't really exist. Having publicly-accessible digital records would make the concept of property ownership simple and deterministic to figure out.

And "my computer got hacked" is kind of a blanket argument against using technology in general - by that same argument you should probably never use digital banking/investment or anything online to manage your life, and nothing should ever be digitized.

For sure - and digitizing that data would take a very long time so it wouldn't be a drop-in replacement for title.

It wouldn't be easy, but it is a good use for the tool.

Real estate, particularly with regards to ownership and property title.

Ownership of a property is a difficult concept to prove, and there is an enormous industry of title insurance which exists to dig through the records and insure a purchase against unknown claims against the property.

A public ledger would make property title/ownership simple and knowable.

Overall I think blockchain technology is incredibly over-hyped, but does have some suitable applications, particularly where public records are involved.

Yes, yes it is.

Very long, but also very well written and worth the read