LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
  • ohtwenty
    +6

    that's how I felt reading this. there's no foundation for what they're saying, no rationalization as far as I've seen that it'll work. I mean I had fun reading this and wbw's article, it's a fun thought experiment, but I don't see how it'll actually work. Unless there's some translation or whatever, but then you're back at square one, except maybe slightly faster transfer of flawed communication.

    And that's without getting into why you would want this, or how you expect to turn a really individualised society into one where enough people want this.

    I mean I have arguments with my wife sometimes about whatever, and we reaaaaaaaaaally talk it out and at the end I feel like I understand her argumentation, why she feels that way, etc, and still disagree. Not seeing how literally thinking what the other person thinks will somehow improve my empathic abilities.