4th Grade Nation State

[Lost heros]

I think we've muddied down both so much that the only difference is where the money goes.

At this point I am not sure I understand Xero's system at all. At first it was just that you paid the losers, but things keep getting added or removed or changed. Can anyone explain what is and is not included now?

How are decisions, made? Where does the money go to? How do we determine who gets what as compensation? How do we determine if there is compensation? How are questions even placed on the "ballot"?

Here's how I understand it. The government, which in Xero's system is there just to mediate bidding like a dealer in poker, releases to the public a series of issues and sides. The public bets on those sides and ALL the money goes to the government to be dispersed how the public sees fit (read: the least efficient way possible). If some issues have an arbitrarily large gap between the options then the more "valued" side is law. If the options don't have this arbitrarily large gap, the public bets on the issues again and the money from the winners goes to the losers. In other words, if you want something done you'll probably have to pay twice. You also don't have to pay taxes and can probably make an income based on equal bidding on noncontroversial bids at the second stage.

[Galloism]

So since so few people have answered i am guessing no one really knows what is and is not included in Xero's system?

Well I'll be chiming in here but honestly I have no idea what the fuck he's on. All I see is a bunch of moved goalposts.

It's called moving the goalposts. Every time you score a goal, he moves the goalposts.

That being said, my experiment is in motion now, and will persist in its current form until completion.

I have no issue with it continuing, it is an interesting experiment. It's just that neither it nor Xeros more...lax "experiment" no longer represent what they where supposed to, meaning that in the end no one is testing Xero's system, whatever that system is.

Xero threads are extremely valuable, honestly.

It'll probably be the methodology by which we attain FTL travel. Of course, we'll only be able to move goalposts at FTL, but that's a start.

[The Two Jerseys]

At this point I am not sure I understand Xero's system at all. At first it was just that you paid the losers, but things keep getting added or removed or changed. Can anyone explain what is and is not included now?

How are decisions, made? Where does the money go to? How do we determine who gets what as compensation? How do we determine if there is compensation? How are questions even placed on the "ballot"?

Here's how I understand it. The government, which in Xero's system is there just to mediate bidding like a dealer in poker, releases to the public a series of issues and sides. The public bets on those sides and ALL the money goes to the government to be dispersed how the public sees fit (read: the least efficient way possible). If some issues have an arbitrarily large gap between the options then the more "valued" side is law. If the options don't have this arbitrarily large gap, the public bets on the issues again and the money from the winners goes to the losers. In other words, if you want something done you'll probably have to pay twice. You also don't have to pay taxes and can probably make an income based on equal bidding on noncontroversial bids at the second stage.

No, I think you still pay taxes, plus you have to bid on quotes and choose where the government spends your bid.

Like I said, I don't see how his experiment remotely reflects how an actual country is run.

[Xerographica]

He did what?

Arguably, he violated copyright ownership of both the experimental results and my construction of those results, by reproducing them on a medium not approved by either the experimenter who owns those results (the professor) or the designer of the spreadsheet cataloguing those results (me).

As a result, I am giving him exactly one chance to remove the offending material from his website and point his reader here if they wish to review it before I contact google with a DMCA takedown notice regarding his blog.

Heh, what? Why, exactly, are you under the impression that my usage doesn't fall under "fair use"? Clearly my intent isn't to profit from the spreadsheets. My intent is purely educational.

As one member of this forum pointed out, it's hard to compare the sheets because they are spread out over several pages. I'm sure that you can appreciate the benefit of consolidating all the sheets?

And, in case you missed it, how many times have you quoted me? Are you going to argue that your use of my words counts as fair use but my use of your numbers does not?

[The Two Jerseys]

Well I'll be chiming in here but honestly I have no idea what the fuck he's on. All I see is a bunch of moved goalposts.

I have no issue with it continuing, it is an interesting experiment. It's just that neither it nor Xeros more...lax "experiment" no longer represent what they where supposed to, meaning that in the end no one is testing Xero's system, whatever that system is.

Xero threads are extremely valuable, honestly.

It'll probably be the methodology by which we attain FTL travel. Of course, we'll only be able to move goalposts at FTL, but that's a start.

Colonel: "How fast did you go up there, Yeager?"
Chuck Yeager: "About 650 or so."
Colonel: "All right! We broke the sound barrier!"
Yeager: (*mumbling*) "Dumbass..."

[Galloism]

Arguably, he violated copyright ownership of both the experimental results and my construction of those results, by reproducing them on a medium not approved by either the experimenter who owns those results (the professor) or the designer of the spreadsheet cataloguing those results (me).

As a result, I am giving him exactly one chance to remove the offending material from his website and point his reader here if they wish to review it before I contact google with a DMCA takedown notice regarding his blog.

Heh, what? Why, exactly, are you under the impression that my usage doesn't fall under "fair use"? Clearly my intent isn't to profit from the spreadsheets. My intent is purely educational.

As one member of this forum pointed out, it's hard to compare the sheets because they are spread out over several pages. I'm sure that you can appreciate the benefit of consolidating all the sheets?

And, in case you missed it, how many times have you quoted me? Are you going to argue that your use of my words counts as fair use but my use of your numbers does not?

I quoted you on this forum, and you give me permission to quote you within the context of this forum. It's part of the terms and conditions you agree to by posting here.

I would not take your system and go post about it on other websites in an attempt to drive web traffic. If you want to consolidate my spreadsheets into a single post, I will permit that - you can add it to your OP in a manner you deem fit, provided it has proper attribution (of course).

Otherwise, I'm sure google's lawyers will look over my claim and your objection thoroughly. Under educational fair use, it must either advance knowledge or progress of the arts through the addition of something new, and must be for nonprofit purposes. Your blog post does none of those things.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

On average it has been. There's been some winners and some losers.

Trying to bet on the losing option has been profitable? Can you prove it with math? Or shall we simply take your word for it?

This has been proven before.

LOL. Really? The math makes quadratic voting harder to exploit? Care to elaborate? If you tried to do so then you'd make a fool of yourself. The primary thing that you're "exploiting" with my model is a person's ability to hedge. Do you seriously think that the "different math" of quadratic voting somehow prevents participants from making hedge deals with each other?

Yes, and this has been proven in the paper you linked to but clearly didn't read. Hedging isn't a good strategy in the model proposed in the paper because the rebate isn't contingent on the outcome of the bidding, which eliminates all strategies surrounding manipulating the winning option. And the quadratic cost means that the price of bidding is proportional to how many bids you have already bought, thus allowing each voter to bid up to a price that is consistent with their valuation.

[Xerographica]

Heh, what? Why, exactly, are you under the impression that my usage doesn't fall under "fair use"? Clearly my intent isn't to profit from the spreadsheets. My intent is purely educational.

As one member of this forum pointed out, it's hard to compare the sheets because they are spread out over several pages. I'm sure that you can appreciate the benefit of consolidating all the sheets?

And, in case you missed it, how many times have you quoted me? Are you going to argue that your use of my words counts as fair use but my use of your numbers does not?

I quoted you on this forum, and you give me permission to quote you within the context of this forum. It's part of the terms and conditions you agree to by posting here.

Really? It's part of the terms and conditions? Care to prove it? Honestly I'd be surprised if it is, given that quoting obviously falls under fair use.

I would not take your system and go post about it on other websites in an attempt to drive web traffic.

Drive web traffic? To what? My blog? Which is... what? The same ideas that we're debating in this thread.

If you want to consolidate my spreadsheets into a single post, I will permit that - you can add it to your OP in a manner you deem fit, provided it has proper attribution (of course).

It's not a bad idea to add the spreadsheets to the OP. But it kinda doesn't make much sense for you to add the spreadsheets to this thread... and then for me to update this OP whenever you do so. It makes more sense for you to start your own OP dedicated to your experiment. Then you can simply update your OP whenever you have new spreadsheets. No need to reduplicate effort in the same thread. Besides, some, including yourself, have already complained that this thread is trying to be a swiss army knife. Your experiment certainly deserves to have its own thread. I'm pretty sure that most would agree.

Also, a part of my reason for uploading the spreadsheets to my blog is that, we hedge our bets. If you look at older threads on this forum you see a gazillion "X" images. For whatever reason, the link broke, or the account was deleted, and the image is no longer available.

Otherwise, I'm sure google's lawyers will look over my claim and your objection thoroughly. Under educational fair use, it must either advance knowledge or progress of the arts through the addition of something new, and must be for nonprofit purposes. Your blog post does none of those things.

Well... my blog obviously isn't for profit. Which doesn't leave too many other categories.

[Galloism]

I quoted you on this forum, and you give me permission to quote you within the context of this forum. It's part of the terms and conditions you agree to by posting here.

Really? It's part of the terms and conditions? Care to prove it? Honestly I'd be surprised if they did, given that quoting obviously falls under fair use.

Here's the terms and conditions.

I would not take your system and go post about it on other websites in an attempt to drive web traffic.

Drive web traffic? To what? My blog? Which is... what? The same ideas that we're debating in this thread.

If you want to consolidate my spreadsheets into a single post, I will permit that - you can add it to your OP in a manner you deem fit, provided it has proper attribution (of course).

It's not a bad idea to add the spreadsheets to the OP. But it kinda doesn't make much sense for you to add the spreadsheets to this thread... and then for me to update this OP whenever you do so. It makes more sense for you to start your own OP dedicated to your experiment. Then you can simply update your OP whenever you have new spreadsheets. No need to reduplicate effort in the same thread. Besides, some, including yourself, have already complained that this thread is trying to be a swiss army knife. Your experiment certainly deserves to have its own thread. I'm pretty sure that most would agree.

Also, a part of my reason for uploading the spreadsheets to my blog is that, we hedge our bets. If you look at older threads on this forum you see a gazillion "X" images. For whatever reason, the link broke, or the account was deleted, and the image is no longer available.

Otherwise, I'm sure google's lawyers will look over my claim and your objection thoroughly. Under educational fair use, it must either advance knowledge or progress of the arts through the addition of something new, and must be for nonprofit purposes. Your blog post does none of those things.

Well... my blog obviously isn't for profit. Which doesn't leave too many other categories.

This discussion is closed. Remove the infringing material or next week I send a DMCA complaint to Google. Period. If you wish to store the spreadsheets somewhere in the event my service goes down or something, that's fine - provided you do not post them on forums, blogs, or places other than Nationstates, where they are permitted.

It makes more sense for you to start your own OP dedicated to your experiment.

No. You want it consolidated, consolidate it - here, on this forum. I won't do your work for you. I'm doing plenty of work for you already when you can't even run a coherent experiment for thirty seconds without corrupting the shit out of it.

[The Two Jerseys]

I quoted you on this forum, and you give me permission to quote you within the context of this forum. It's part of the terms and conditions you agree to by posting here.

Really? It's part of the terms and conditions? Care to prove it? Honestly I'd be surprised if it is, given that quoting obviously falls under fair use.

Uhh, if the T&C's don't allow me to quote you on this forum, then why would the forum have a "reply with quote" button on every post?

[Xerographica]

Really? It's part of the terms and conditions? Care to prove it? Honestly I'd be surprised if they did, given that quoting obviously falls under fair use.

Here's the terms and conditions.

Please quote the part that states that I give you permission to quote me. If you think it's in there, then it should be easy for you to do so.

This discussion is closed. Remove the infringing material or next week I send a DMCA complaint to Google. Period.

In case you missed it, I'm extremely confident that my use of your spreadsheets counts as fair. This means that your threat doesn't even concern me a little.

It makes more sense for you to start your own OP dedicated to your experiment.

No. You want it consolidated, consolidate it. I won't do your work for you. I'm doing plenty of work for you already when you can't even run a coherent experiment for thirty seconds without corrupting the shit out of it.

To be clear, I'm not running "my" experiment. Michelle is. Just like you aren't running "your" experiment. The psychology professor is running it. You simply facilitated it... and you really didn't do so for me. None of the "work" on your part is for me. Pretending otherwise is laughable. Any effort on your part is to try and prove me wrong. Proving me wrong would make you happy. Therefore, any of the "work" that you're doing is for yourself.

Anyways, like I said, I'll be happy to remove your spreadsheets from my blog if you start a thread that consolidates your spreadsheets. I think this is a super fair compromise.

To be clear, I'll continue to download copies of your spreadsheets. If, for whatever reason, the links to your spreadsheets break, then I will upload my copies of your spreadsheets to my blog.

[Galloism]

This discussion is closed. Remove the infringing material or next week I send a DMCA complaint to Google. Period.

In case you missed it, I'm extremely confident that my use of your spreadsheets counts as fair. This means that your threat doesn't even concern me a little.

That's your call, of course.

Anyways, like I said, I'll be happy to remove your spreadsheets from my blog if you start a thread that consolidates your spreadsheets. I think this is a super fair compromise.

No, the copyright infringer does not get to make demands of the injured party.

To be clear, I'll continue to download copies of your spreadsheets. If, for whatever reason, the links to your spreadsheets break, then I will upload my copies of your spreadsheets to my blog.

You may download them for reuploading to an imagine service for posting on nationstates, provided you give proper attribution. I do not give any permission to post them on your blog or any other website.

[The Two Jerseys]

Here's the terms and conditions.

Please quote the part that states that I give you permission to quote me. If you think it's in there, then it should be easy for you to do so.

This discussion is closed. Remove the infringing material or next week I send a DMCA complaint to Google. Period.

In case you missed it, I'm extremely confident that my use of your spreadsheets counts as fair. This means that your threat doesn't even concern me a little.

No. You want it consolidated, consolidate it. I won't do your work for you. I'm doing plenty of work for you already when you can't even run a coherent experiment for thirty seconds without corrupting the shit out of it.

To be clear, I'm not running "my" experiment. Michelle is. Just like you aren't running "your" experiment. The psychology professor is running it. You simply facilitated it... and you really didn't do so for me. None of the "work" on your part is for me. Pretending otherwise is laughable. Any effort on your part is to try and prove me wrong. Proving me wrong would make you happy. Therefore, any of the "work" that you're doing is for yourself.

Anyways, like I said, I'll be happy to remove your spreadsheets from my blog if you start a thread that consolidates your spreadsheets. I think this is a super fair compromise.

To be clear, I'll continue to download copies of your spreadsheets. If, for whatever reason, the links to your spreadsheets break, then I will upload my copies of your spreadsheets to my blog.

I don't think you understand the situation...

You're the guy over the barrel, and are in no position to make demands of Gallo.

[Xerographica]

Really? It's part of the terms and conditions? Care to prove it? Honestly I'd be surprised if it is, given that quoting obviously falls under fair use.

Uhh, if the T&C's don't allow me to quote you on this forum, then why would the forum have a "reply with quote" button on every post?

My argument is that there's absolutely no need for the T&C to specify that we can quote each other because quoting each other clearly and obviously counts as fair use.

Plus, how many OPs contain charts/graphs/pictures created by non-members? If we look through Galloism's posts are we going to find any charts/graphs/pictures that non-members have created? How many charts/graphs/pictures created by non-members have you used in your posts?

[Xerographica]

In case you missed it, I'm extremely confident that my use of your spreadsheets counts as fair. This means that your threat doesn't even concern me a little.

That's your call, of course.

Anyways, like I said, I'll be happy to remove your spreadsheets from my blog if you start a thread that consolidates your spreadsheets. I think this is a super fair compromise.

No, the copyright infringer does not get to make demands of the injured party.

To be clear, I'll continue to download copies of your spreadsheets. If, for whatever reason, the links to your spreadsheets break, then I will upload my copies of your spreadsheets to my blog.

You may download them for reuploading to an imagine service for posting on nationstates, provided you give proper attribution. I do not give any permission to post them on your blog or any other website.

Thanks to fair use, I really don't need your permission to post them on my blog.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

That's your call, of course.



No, the copyright infringer does not get to make demands of the injured party.



You may download them for reuploading to an imagine service for posting on nationstates, provided you give proper attribution. I do not give any permission to post them on your blog or any other website.

Thanks to fair use, I really don't need your permission to post them on my blog.

What you did is not "fair use".

At best, it is plagiarism. At worst it is copyright infringement because you never asked permission from Galloism to use it in your website.

Which now makes me wonder. Gallo, do you think it'd be a fair exercise to see just how much is Xero's WPT for your research?!

[The Two Jerseys]

Which now makes me wonder. Gallo, do you think it'd be a fair exercise to see just how much is Xero's WPT for your research?!

[Xerographica]

Thanks to fair use, I really don't need your permission to post them on my blog.

What you did is not "fair use".

At best, it is plagiarism. At worst it is copyright infringement because you never asked permission from Galloism to use it in your website.

Which now makes me wonder. Gallo, do you think it'd be a fair exercise to see just how much is Xero's WPT for your research?!

It's not "his" research just like it's not his intellectual property. Coasianism is my intellectual property. But I certainly didn't get my panties in a bunch when Galloism didn't ask me for my permission to facilitate an experiment based on my intellectual property.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

What you did is not "fair use".

At best, it is plagiarism. At worst it is copyright infringement because you never asked permission from Galloism to use it in your website.

Which now makes me wonder. Gallo, do you think it'd be a fair exercise to see just how much is Xero's WPT for your research?!

It's not "his" research just like it's not his intellectual property. Coasianism is my intellectual property. But I certainly didn't get my panties in a bunch when Galloism didn't ask me for my permission to facilitate an experiment based on my intellectual property.

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

IP is not whatever he is the owner to, it is whatever he comes up with as an idea. The experiment setup and any results the university cares to share with him, therefore, is his copyright.

[Salandriagado]

What you did is not "fair use".

At best, it is plagiarism. At worst it is copyright infringement because you never asked permission from Galloism to use it in your website.

Which now makes me wonder. Gallo, do you think it'd be a fair exercise to see just how much is Xero's WPT for your research?!

It's not "his" research just like it's not his intellectual property. Coasianism is my intellectual property. But I certainly didn't get my panties in a bunch when Galloism didn't ask me for my permission to facilitate an experiment based on my intellectual property.

Erm, no. That's not how intellectual property works. You do not require permission to do your own research based on research that has already been posted. It absolutely is his intellectual property (or possibly some of it belongs to the professor/university in question, depending on how they have agreed things between them). More to the point, Google do not piss around with DMCA notices. If you want your blog to still exist, take that shit down.

[Xerographica]

It's not "his" research just like it's not his intellectual property. Coasianism is my intellectual property. But I certainly didn't get my panties in a bunch when Galloism didn't ask me for my permission to facilitate an experiment based on my intellectual property.

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

Really? It was his idea for the class to use coasianism to decide whether to have class inside or outside?

[Salandriagado]

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

Really? It was his idea for the class to use coasianism to decide whether to have class inside or outside?

It was his idea to conduct a controlled experiment, yes.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

Really? It was his idea for the class to use coasianism to decide whether to have class inside or outside?

Your idea is a very specific one. Your idea was to implement coasianism in a 4th grade setting in order to see how your system would evolve eventually. That's your idea.

His idea was to conduct an experiment to see the effects of hedging in your system among a group of University students. He's the owner of that idea and the results of that experiment because it is a formal experiment.

[Galloism]

It's not "his" research just like it's not his intellectual property. Coasianism is my intellectual property. But I certainly didn't get my panties in a bunch when Galloism didn't ask me for my permission to facilitate an experiment based on my intellectual property.

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

IP is not whatever he is the owner to, it is whatever he comes up with as an idea. The experiment setup and any results the university cares to share with him, therefore, is his copyright.

Besides that, even if it was, I had permission, nay, direction:

Really it boils down to fundamentally basic questions...

1. What happens when kids are taxed?
2. What happens when kids can choose where their taxes go?
3. What happens when voting is replaced with spending?
4. What happens when quotes are auctioned?

Most of the members of this forum oppose coasianism and pragmatarianism. So they should suspect that bad things will happen when kids can choose where their taxes go and voting is replaced with spending. Or, they should suspect that better things will happen when kids can't choose where their taxes go and voting is not replaced with spending.

Personally, and obviously, I think the questions that I'm asking are very interesting. And it's fine if you don't think that they are interesting. Can you think of more interesting questions?

YES?

Then ask them and find a classroom to help you answer them

NO?

Then you and/or your parents should try and get a refund on your education

Emphasis mine.

An imperative statement, even.

[The Two Jerseys]

I don't think you understand how copyright law works.

He's the creator of the experiment, therefore he's the rightful owner of the experiment. The University is the rightful owner of the results as the facilitator of the means of the experiment, and the psychology professor conducting it has, by their role as a professor and a researcher, all the rights of the university to use it within the context of university publications (articles, journals, books, etc.).

In all of this, you're not the copyright owner. Therefore, your attempts to integrate his research into your posts are, at best, an unauthorized use for his research.

IP is not whatever he is the owner to, it is whatever he comes up with as an idea. The experiment setup and any results the university cares to share with him, therefore, is his copyright.

Besides that, even if it was, I had permission, nay, direction:

Really it boils down to fundamentally basic questions...

1. What happens when kids are taxed?
2. What happens when kids can choose where their taxes go?
3. What happens when voting is replaced with spending?
4. What happens when quotes are auctioned?

Most of the members of this forum oppose coasianism and pragmatarianism. So they should suspect that bad things will happen when kids can choose where their taxes go and voting is replaced with spending. Or, they should suspect that better things will happen when kids can't choose where their taxes go and voting is not replaced with spending.

Personally, and obviously, I think the questions that I'm asking are very interesting. And it's fine if you don't think that they are interesting. Can you think of more interesting questions?

YES?

Then ask them and find a classroom to help you answer them

NO?

Then you and/or your parents should try and get a refund on your education

Emphasis mine.

An imperative statement, even.

Touché.

En garde! Prêts? Allez!