@Ribby Moreover, in some deep sense, there are levels. Even if Dalio's shorter version is too much of a reduction compared to the whole book, it is order of magnitudes less of a reduction compared to what happens today around us: quotes, bits, excerpts, and most of, TL;DRs. In that sense, perhaps you'd agree that _if only_ the reduction we were dealing with were like Dalio's short-book version.

@Ribby Well, first of all thank you very much for reading until that point! Second, I understand, this is a bit slippery. But I should clarify one thing. There is a difference between (i) the reduction of history Dalio does in his work, and (ii) the reduction _of_ his work into the short version. You seem to have a problem with (i). I, on the other hand, talk about (ii) and claim it is not an over-reduction of the full book.