341–350 of 443 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apparently google has an Ethicist. Well, had . From his bio snippet at the bottom: "Ex-Design Ethicist & Product Philosopher @ Google"
It sounded to me like a euphemism for hanging out on the roof waiting for your non compete agreement term to run out.
Early competitors of Google thought that accurate search results only served to drive users away from their site and search was therefore an unimportant part of an overall "Internet company". It would be interesting to see a grocery chain with the philosophy of "find what you want really fast" rather than "make it really difficult to find what you want so you spend longer here" - it could be very successful by the same analogy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you don't think "what we are" is changed by the tools we use but it is changed by changes in cultural norms? Which are clearly influenced by the tools we use?
No, I think neither the tools we use nor our cultural norms really define what we are, just what we do , philosophically speaking. I think we're a a race of culture creating tool users that strive to advance. The tools we currently use and the cultures we find ourselves currently creating at most stages in a progression, and possibly not even that, but just fleeting memes in the story of our species (if we don't dead…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reduce our emissions. This has one potential and one actual effect. 1) Potential: If climate change is significantly affected by human output, then we may curb or counter the current climate trends. 2) Actual: Healthier environment for life on this planet. We won't have cities like Los Angeles used to be, or Beijing is now where people can barely go outside without taking a year off their life. This is, without a dou…
Reminds me of a comic I see floated around Facebook from time to time of an auditorium of scientists seated beneath a banner reading "Climate Change Conference," and someone raises their hand and says something to the effect of "But what if we're wrong about climate change and we make a better world for nothing?"
That money has to come from somewhere. It could be spent on healthcare, getting people clean water, etc.
To me that would be a tragedy.
Kind of interesting idea about how our tools (generic) present us with limited menus, and effectively restrict our options. Facebook has expanded (barely) the options for basic responses to posts (no longer just like, but also a handful of emoticons to express laughter, anger, sadness, etc.). Not as full an option as when using the comment box, but for quick responses it allows for greater expressiveness. At least pe…
> the demo was with a graduation photo, and a few suggested responses like "You look great!" "Congratulations, so happy for you" or something similar). Don't know why anyone would actually use features like this. It's very impersonal and insincere
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of a comic I see floated around Facebook from time to time of an auditorium of scientists seated beneath a banner reading "Climate Change Conference," and someone raises their hand and says something to the effect of "But what if we're wrong about climate change and we make a better world for nothing?"
What happens if we spend hundreds of billions of dollars on reducing CO2 emissions and it turns out it was all for naught? That money has to come from somewhere. It could be spent on healthcare, getting people clean water, etc. To me that would be a tragedy.
Communicating directly via writing or talking is the only thing here that is not driven by limited choices.
It reminds me of the koan about the expressiveness of the command line compared to point and click:
http://catb.org/esr/writings/unix-koans/gui-programmer.html
One evening, Master Foo and Nubi attended a gathering of programmers who had met to learn from each other. One of the programmers asked Nubi to what school he and his master belonged. Upon being told they were followers of the Great Way of Unix, the programmer grew scornful.
“The command-line tools of Unix are crude and backward,” he scoffed. “Modern, properly designed operating systems do everything through a graphical user interface.”
Master Foo said nothing, but pointed at the moon. A nearby dog began to bark at the master's hand.
“I don't understand you!” said the programmer.
Master Foo remained silent, and pointed at an image of the Buddha. Then he pointed at a window.
“What are you trying to tell me?” asked the programmer.
Master Foo pointed at the programmer's head. Then he pointed at a rock.
“Why can't you make yourself clear?” demanded the programmer.
Master Foo frowned thoughtfully, tapped the programmer twice on the nose, and dropped him in a nearby trashcan.
As the programmer was attempting to extricate himself from the garbage, the dog wandered over and piddled on him.
At that moment, the programmer achieved enlightenment.