(But maybe that's just my interpretation based on something else going wrong in the animation)

And unless you're born rich, you start your life with debt: You need some form of retirement money for the last 20 something years you might not be able to work anymore.

If you buy assets on a loan/mortgage/etc, it's more like you're materializing this debt early.

My initial reading was that the author intended to imply that philisophizing about memories was a repeated thing in Pratchetts writings. Which - given my limited exposure - seemed plausible to me.

Good article? Definitely not. But I've also read similar try-hard / pseudo literary blog posts pre AI.

But the claim was that it "makes zero sense".

Furniture is established as an image for memories just a few lines earlier. And the quote directly afterwards is framed precisely in this image.

And this seems to be an intentional category error.

The idea is to redistribute from the ultra wealthy to everyone else. Why would you then pretend that these methods should be convertable?

Just keep the conversation simple:

- Everyone with more than 10m in assets pays wealth tax on the value above 10m.

I think one argument would be that the language seems to be effect based.

This allows you to control what a program can do without auditing the code.

My objection would then be that actually, that's not true. The real statement would be "In everyday life (including science), we accept explanation gaps already in many places"

But this does not mean that we have to accept this particular instance of an explanation gap.

And yeah: Gamification became shallow real fast. Even the Gamification techniques in games! I think the reason is that everyone focused on adopting the easy part (checkboxes, achievements, levels) while skipping the real core (player types, intrinsic motivation)... But the course even warned about this level of shallow implementation.

(Btw: A few months later I enrolled in a course on educational psychology on coursera that was supposed to showcase some SOTA techniques... They canceled it because they could not work out the details. I think academia is often just not good at pulling things off.)

"Model Thinking" was great!

And I really liked the gamification course by Kevin Werbach (The topic was still hot back then) - something I used extensively at my start up.

If you treat the source tree seriously, you can communicate a lot with how it is structured

It's not enough anymore to have someone push nice pixels for you.

You'll need to consider if your design aligns with how you want to position yourself wrt to other players in your space.