Originally Posted by ummidk
Must be hard to convince people of your idea while contemplating how stupid they are:
You know what ? Your reaction is extremely upsetting and discouraging to me at how stupid it is, at the total opposite of reality.
The truth is that for a large number of years, in different ways (about different topics) I have been infinitely persistent in trying to trust other people and expect them to be sane and to behave in some way that is a minimum serious and makes any sense. And I have been systematically, extremely disappointed. But I still cannot get used to this vertiginous observation of how dumb are people, so that I still continuously commit the terrible mistake of expecting them to be sane, which they actually, decidedly aren't.
Thus this accusation you are making to me that I would be a priori insulting, a priori distrusting, and thus repelling people in this way, is absolutely, infinitely untrue.
What lost me, is my shyness, my weakness in making over and over again the same absolute mistake: the mistake of trying to trust other people, expecting them to be sane. Expecting that when they appear to be nice and thoughtful, they present themselves as trustworthy, I should try to give them a chance and trust them.
This lost me in many ways.
The problem, the misunderstanding, why you might have a different experience than mine, is that we are not dealing with the same questions, the same problems.
The problems that I deal with are some of the fundamental questions, that turn out to be very hard problems, much harder than many people imagine if we wish to treat them in a not completely mistaken manner, and thus for which the usual average trustworthiness of people in their own eyes, does not apply.
Because they see themselves reliable in their own eyes... only for their usual little problems that do not require any serious care.
Another factor that lead me to have more misfortune trying to take other people seriously, is that, since I am extremely serious, I also tried to take other people extremely seriously, and to keep trusting them extremely strongly, much further than other people would care listening to each other. Because I expect words to make sense and claims to be serious, while "ordinary people" take things more lightly, and don't push to try taking claims seriously because it is natural for them to just take everything unseriously, so that when someones claims to know something, well, we all know it does not mean anything anyway, so that there is no problem, no question to study, nothing to trust, we can go to have fun and not care about anything, so that all is right.
You think this negativity would be the cause why I did not convince anyone ? You are also making a huge mistake by assuming that I did not convince anyone, which is absolutely untrue. I have a regular experience of convincing over 95% of people who physically came to the presentations and debates that I did of my ideas. That is, of course they first have objections, but then a a rational debate takes place and finally they are convinced of my arguments. The problem is, these people were usually not programmers (but rather economics students) and did not repeat the news to anyone else, because... well, only stupid, trivial news are able to be repeated. News that require non-trivial explanations, do not go through mouth-to ear or any other usual communication media.
There is also a longer dissertation by another author on this general issue
of misinterpreting a posteriori reports of facts as if they were the cause of these facts.
Originally Posted by RestInReason
What, exactly, did you want web developers to do after reading about your ideas? Proactively email you saying, "I want to help; tell me what to do"?
Yes. Contact me and start a discussion so that we can elaborate a working plan together. What's the problem ? But they don't try to contact me to start a discussion, I can't see why, except if they just want to be satisfied to see things as unclear with no idea what to do.