Re: Financial allocation poll stage 3
Ian Clarke <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 2:05 PM, Matthew Toseland [email protected] wrote:It doesn't always work. Sometimes it is necessary to make a start on the big-ticket items, even though they're costly. If their value justifies their cost, and each is estimated with some degree of accuracy, then this approach will prioritize big-ticket items. The classic example of this is market failure in carbon credits: Carbon trading finds the "easy wins" very quickly, but it's very poor at things like encouraging building new wind farms rather than coal plants. In fact it's so bad at this that an entirely separate mechanism is needed in the electricity sector. Not to get offtopic, but carbon credits are an entirely artificial market, so any failure is probably a failure in how the market was set up, rather than in the concept of a market itself. But this is offtopic. Does this reasoning apply to Freenet? Well, there are some fundamental problems that should bear a high priority even though their immediate visible impact to users may not be that spectacular. Security improvements are an example (e.g. deploying Arne's darknet security fix). Although here, darknet usability/performance enhancements are the big one. Not only do they improve security, they may actually help to get us some viral growth. Winning all around... Really that sort of thing just means you've under-estimated the value of a big task. Which is bound to happen, but I'm not sure how to avoid it... This just assumes that participants will make bad value decisions when they provide their estimates. Seems unnecessarily pessimistic. Ian. Ian Clarke Founder, The Freenet Project Email: [email protected] On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 2:05 PM, Matthew Toseland [email protected] wrote: On 28/08/16 19:48, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 1:32 PM, Matthew Toseland [email protected] wrote: > On 28/08/16 19:29, Ian wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Matthew Toseland <[email protected]> >> wrote:> That's not what was asked. My prioritization proposal >> separates the > >> estimation of the value of completing a task from the estimation of the > >> task's cost. These can then be combined later to come up with a > >> prioritization. > > > > > Which will inherently prefer "easy wins". Which is probably a good > > thing. > I agree. The principle is very simple, maximize value relative to > cost. Then all > you need is a way to estimate value and cost, these are hard problems > in the > general case but I think our approaches will work well. > So, if anyone disagrees with the approach, either they disagree that > we must > maximize value relative to cost (I'd love to hear that argument), or > they need > to propose a better approach to estimating value and cost. It doesn't always work. Sometimes it is necessary to make a start on the big-ticket items, even though they're costly. The classic example of this is market failure in carbon credits: Carbon trading finds the "easy wins" very quickly, but it's very poor at things like encouraging building new wind farms rather than coal plants. In fact it's so bad at this that an entirely separate mechanism is needed in the electricity sector. Does this reasoning apply to Freenet? Well, there are some fundamental problems that should bear a high priority even though their immediate visible impact to users may not be that spectacular. Security improvements are an example (e.g. deploying Arne's darknet security fix). Although here, darknet usability/performance enhancements are the big one. Not only do they improve security, they may actually help to get us some viral growth. Winning all around... Really that sort of thing just means you've under-estimated the value of a big task. Which is bound to happen, but I'm not sure how to avoid it... > Ian. > Ian Clarke > Founder, The Freenet Project > Email: [email protected] _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- Ian Clarke Stacks - The AI CFO for your personal finances http://trystacks.com/ _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl