!mediashare@lemmy.world

So if the argument were about whether a license was important, in the general case, as a selling pointl for books, I would have no choice but to concede.

I have no high regard for the guy, but are you seriously, like seriously seriously, trying to tell people that Jordan Peterson depends on his professional title for… literally anything?

Are you saying that without it, he will lose a non-trivial amount of… anything?

“Bro, do you know what really sucks? Not having best-in-class third-party audited end-to-end encryption so nobody ever finds out about all the shit we’re about to get up to. Like, do you even wanna do drugs, bro?”

I believe I read elsewhere that pay and everything else stayed the same which was the point of the trial. The businesses didn’t expect to like it but were so impressed with the results that they went ahead and kept it. It was an unqualified win for all parties.

AFAICT it really is as good as it sounds like, no gotchas.

Late to reply, but generally Lemmy users are advanced/veteran Reddit users, and advanced Reddit users more or less share a pool of common knowledge based on topics that often come up or were significant, etc. Aspartame is up there with things like fluoride in the water supply in terms of notoriety. Not saying people agree one way or the other, but it should at least be well known that it’s controversial.

Even if the value of money goes up, it’s by a paltry 1-2% and it still wouldn’t seem to make sense to hoard rather than invest, unless I’m missing something. In what scenario would any rich person just sit on their money? Likewise, the impact of 2% deflation on a bank loan is well within the variance in rates we see today, and I imagine in such an economy the rates would be adjusted somewhat to compensate.

Simply put, the difference between an inflating vs deflating currency doesn’t seem enough to drastically alter people’s behavior. In the short to medium term it seems almost a non-issue, at least for regular people, and in the long term people won’t get fucked out of their life savings. I imagine the vast majority of the population doesn’t invest their money. Which policy would they prefer?

I think he was just explaining what the other person meant. You’re inferring or assuming a subtext of disagreement or antagonism that I’m just not seeing.

You’re knowledgeable and capable enough to sign up for Lemmy, but you don’t know aspartame is bad?