Good enough on what criteria? If you mean that NVC hasn’t managed to completely take over the world, bring world peace and reshape everyone’s language, that’s of course true. But I know plenty of people who know about it and find it really valuable and important.
Asked how many people might have gotten exposed to it and gotten concrete value out of it, Claude estimated maybe 2.5 to 6 million people; Gemini put it lower at around 1.5 million. If we go for a very low-end estimate and say that only 1 million people in the world have benefited from knowing NVC… then it’s still at least good enough to benefit a million people, which isn’t enormous, but still pretty good for a system made up by one guy.
If you mean that NVC hasn’t managed to completely take over the world, bring world peace and reshape everyone’s language, that’s of course true.
No, I thought that’s what you thought about its potential (minus the comedic exaggeration), if everybody got the uncorrupted message. If you simply meant that ten million might benefit instead of one million, I have no objections.
Makes sense, thanks for explaining. I think when I wrote that, I meant to gesture more at “people will adopt useful-to-them versions of ideas even if those versions aren’t totally truthful”, though of course it does also imply that the uncorrupted version has truth value.
Good enough on what criteria? If you mean that NVC hasn’t managed to completely take over the world, bring world peace and reshape everyone’s language, that’s of course true. But I know plenty of people who know about it and find it really valuable and important.
Asked how many people might have gotten exposed to it and gotten concrete value out of it, Claude estimated maybe 2.5 to 6 million people; Gemini put it lower at around 1.5 million. If we go for a very low-end estimate and say that only 1 million people in the world have benefited from knowing NVC… then it’s still at least good enough to benefit a million people, which isn’t enormous, but still pretty good for a system made up by one guy.
No, I thought that’s what you thought about its potential (minus the comedic exaggeration), if everybody got the uncorrupted message. If you simply meant that ten million might benefit instead of one million, I have no objections.
Ah. I didn’t think I was saying anything about its potential one way or the other, only about the mechanics of how it seems to get interpreted.
I was mainly going of off this, the perceived implication being that there is a widely-applicable truth value in the uncorrupted idea.
Makes sense, thanks for explaining. I think when I wrote that, I meant to gesture more at “people will adopt useful-to-them versions of ideas even if those versions aren’t totally truthful”, though of course it does also imply that the uncorrupted version has truth value.