Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Friedrich Hayek: “Knowledge is widely dispersed. We want to make use of knowledge possessed by millions of individuals, which they can only use if they’re fed signals [i.e., prices] about the general situation.” “You can’t possibly concentrate this knowledge.”

FAHayekSays's profile picture

F. A. Hayek Quotes

32,752 subscribers

12,853 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Friedrich Hayek explains why socialism fails: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge of millions of men.”
0:29

Friedrich Hayek explains why socialism fails: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge of millions of men.”

F. A. Hayek Quotes

113,306 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Hayek: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge of millions of men.”
0:37

Hayek: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge of millions of men.”

F. A. Hayek Quotes

483,257 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Hayek: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that the modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge.”
0:37

Hayek: “Socialism assumes that all the available knowledge can be used by a single central authority.” “It overlooks that the modern society is based on the utilization of widely dispersed knowledge.”

F. A. Hayek Quotes

73,768 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Friedrich Hayek: “Marxists can never understand the functioning of the market. They believe it’s the costs which determine prices. The truth is exactly the opposite: it’s prices which tell people how much cost they ought to involve... It is prices by which the knowledge of millions of people can be conveyed to others and serve as a guide to them.”
1:15

Friedrich Hayek: “Marxists can never understand the functioning of the market. They believe it’s the costs which determine prices. The truth is exactly the opposite: it’s prices which tell people how much cost they ought to involve... It is prices by which the knowledge of millions of people can be conveyed to others and serve as a guide to them.”

F. A. Hayek Quotes

98,810 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Friedrich Hayek on the illusion of “given data”: “Data are fictitiously assumed to be given to the explaining theorists.” “But the data are not really given to them or anyone else. Data are widely dispersed knowledge of millions of people, which can in no way be unified.”
0:43

Friedrich Hayek on the illusion of “given data”: “Data are fictitiously assumed to be given to the explaining theorists.” “But the data are not really given to them or anyone else. Data are widely dispersed knowledge of millions of people, which can in no way be unified.”

Voices of Liberty

11,786 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."
3:03

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."

Karl Popper Quotes

115,377 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Hayek on Marxism vs economic reality: “Marxists can never understand the functioning of the market. They believe it’s the costs which determine prices.” “The truth is exactly the opposite: it’s prices which tell people how much cost they ought to involve. It is prices by which the knowledge of millions of people can be conveyed to others and serve as a guide to them.”
1:15

Hayek on Marxism vs economic reality: “Marxists can never understand the functioning of the market. They believe it’s the costs which determine prices.” “The truth is exactly the opposite: it’s prices which tell people how much cost they ought to involve. It is prices by which the knowledge of millions of people can be conveyed to others and serve as a guide to them.”

F. A. Hayek Quotes

101,628 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

The most important question about any decision isn’t who’s smart enough to make it, but who actually has the knowledge to make it. In 1945, Friedrich Hayek pointed out that most of what we need to know to make good decisions is never written down anywhere. It’s scattered in millions of people’s heads, about local prices, preferences, and circumstances that no single expert could ever collect. Then in 1980, Thomas Sowell expanded that idea into a full theory in “Knowledge and Decisions”. Hayek himself called it one of the best explanations of his own work. Sowell’s point is that political and legal systems concentrate decisions in a few “articulate” people, while markets let millions of people with direct knowledge decide for themselves. Intentions are irrelevant. The question is who actually knows enough and who pays the price when they’re wrong.
0:30

The most important question about any decision isn’t who’s smart enough to make it, but who actually has the knowledge to make it. In 1945, Friedrich Hayek pointed out that most of what we need to know to make good decisions is never written down anywhere. It’s scattered in millions of people’s heads, about local prices, preferences, and circumstances that no single expert could ever collect. Then in 1980, Thomas Sowell expanded that idea into a full theory in “Knowledge and Decisions”. Hayek himself called it one of the best explanations of his own work. Sowell’s point is that political and legal systems concentrate decisions in a few “articulate” people, while markets let millions of people with direct knowledge decide for themselves. Intentions are irrelevant. The question is who actually knows enough and who pays the price when they’re wrong.

Rothmus 🏴

22,837 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Too often, bosses use their knowledge of rules and laws to exploit workers. But if you like the idea of workers turning the tables... you might want to see this.
0:58

Too often, bosses use their knowledge of rules and laws to exploit workers. But if you like the idea of workers turning the tables... you might want to see this.

More Perfect Union

2,069,633 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

ELON: WE’RE BUILDING A MODERN LIBRARY OF ALEXANDRIA ACROSS EARTH, THE MOON, AND MARS “The idea behind Galactica is to create an open source repository of all knowledge, a distillation of all knowledge, meaning anyone can access it, anyone can use it, and if other people want to train on it, they can do so. We want to create copies of this and distribute them throughout Earth, and even put them on the Moon, Mars, and out into deep space. In a way, it’s a modern day Library of Alexandria. It was a great tragedy that the Library of Alexandria burned down, and so to preserve this knowledge, we want to literally etch it in stone and distribute it widely." Source: Source: Baron Capital
1:32

ELON: WE’RE BUILDING A MODERN LIBRARY OF ALEXANDRIA ACROSS EARTH, THE MOON, AND MARS “The idea behind Galactica is to create an open source repository of all knowledge, a distillation of all knowledge, meaning anyone can access it, anyone can use it, and if other people want to train on it, they can do so. We want to create copies of this and distribute them throughout Earth, and even put them on the Moon, Mars, and out into deep space. In a way, it’s a modern day Library of Alexandria. It was a great tragedy that the Library of Alexandria burned down, and so to preserve this knowledge, we want to literally etch it in stone and distribute it widely." Source: Source: Baron Capital

Mario Nawfal

90,633 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

"I identify liberalism as a product of the Enlightenment, which I characterize as the idea that we can use knowledge to enhance human flourishing, and that if we try to do it, we can gradually succeed." - Steven Pinker
0:44

"I identify liberalism as a product of the Enlightenment, which I characterize as the idea that we can use knowledge to enhance human flourishing, and that if we try to do it, we can gradually succeed." - Steven Pinker

The UnPopulist

129,374 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Introducing the Knowledge Base MCP. Greptile maintains a detailed knowledge base of how every part of your codebase works, as well as a history of past incidents. Starting today coding agents like Codex, Claude can access the Knowledge Base via Greptile's MCP, so they can use Greptile's learnings to write better code.
0:39

Introducing the Knowledge Base MCP. Greptile maintains a detailed knowledge base of how every part of your codebase works, as well as a history of past incidents. Starting today coding agents like Codex, Claude can access the Knowledge Base via Greptile's MCP, so they can use Greptile's learnings to write better code.

Greptile

65,243 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

For years, I have been building the perfect knowledge assistant. I mean, that's what supermemory originally launched as! Today, we are relaunching the consumer side of supermemory. Fully powered by the supermemory API. After our Claude code, OpenClaw and other launches blew up to millions of views, it was clear: Consumers WANT their context to be interoperable within models they use. They want their AI to truly understand them, have great memory, and build over time. They want to use this truly wherever they are - or with every AI they use - Claude code, or OpenClaw, or Raycast. They want to bring their memories from chatgpt, claude, twitter bookmarks, and teach their AI, about them. This is your knowledge, and supermemory is the assistant. evolving, understanding, growing with time.
0:49

For years, I have been building the perfect knowledge assistant. I mean, that's what supermemory originally launched as! Today, we are relaunching the consumer side of supermemory. Fully powered by the supermemory API. After our Claude code, OpenClaw and other launches blew up to millions of views, it was clear: Consumers WANT their context to be interoperable within models they use. They want their AI to truly understand them, have great memory, and build over time. They want to use this truly wherever they are - or with every AI they use - Claude code, or OpenClaw, or Raycast. They want to bring their memories from chatgpt, claude, twitter bookmarks, and teach their AI, about them. This is your knowledge, and supermemory is the assistant. evolving, understanding, growing with time.

Dhravya Shah

36,660 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

In the latest version, you can use the Insight Generator, an early alpha feature that helps you grasp the knowledge structure of a long article ten times faster and quickly navigate to different parts of the knowledge source that are useful or interesting to you.
1:08

In the latest version, you can use the Insight Generator, an early alpha feature that helps you grasp the knowledge structure of a long article ten times faster and quickly navigate to different parts of the knowledge source that are useful or interesting to you.

Heptabase

15,347 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Slot came and use Klopp’s tactics is just so casual and reeks of poor knowledge about the game. You can’t see the details, that’s why you don’t know. Listen to Salah speak when they won the league and I’ll post the link of the full interview.
1:18

Slot came and use Klopp’s tactics is just so casual and reeks of poor knowledge about the game. You can’t see the details, that’s why you don’t know. Listen to Salah speak when they won the league and I’ll post the link of the full interview.

TobyWrites

204,533 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.
3:08

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.

Deutsch Explains

143,949 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

WE ARE THE ANCESTORS.. People fear what they don’t understand And Europeans worship the Greeks As the origin of knowledge Even though they got most of the knowledge from Kemet But this classic scene in a Disney film did highlight African spirituality and the power of the ancestors and libations Where you use water to tap into the ancestors for guidance
2:11

WE ARE THE ANCESTORS.. People fear what they don’t understand And Europeans worship the Greeks As the origin of knowledge Even though they got most of the knowledge from Kemet But this classic scene in a Disney film did highlight African spirituality and the power of the ancestors and libations Where you use water to tap into the ancestors for guidance

MASTER STUDENT🤲🏾

18,599 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce