Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'd stick to first order thinking, thanks.

It's easy to get things wrong trying to do second order thinking, or just make things up.

There's no reason to believe companies would do as you say. There are several other options, including choosing different financial vehicles to store the users money, implementing even more dark patterns to store N% more money so they are even, or can improve their returns over the status quo.



Your entire second paragraph is second order. You can’t just ignore consequences in a policy debate.


yes, my second paragraph is second order to explain how there can be many many possibilities, not the one you wish would happen.

> You can’t just ignore consequences in a policy debate.

Consequences of consequences though, you can route almost any argument to any conclusion you want :)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: