121–130 of 223 posts
I cannot recommend Manna enough (I assume it's similar to the online version [1]). It portrays a version of the future that I believe is achievable by continuing open-source software development and extending it to (more and more powerful) AI. [1] http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
I've read shoe dog. Entertaining fast read but I don't think you should prioritize it unless you're really into sneakers or Nike.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguing that the whole list is less credible because Friedman's on it? I mean, it's fine if you want to maintain your own epistemic closure, but expecting everyone else to agree? And even you should read him, if for no other reason to be sure you understand what you're disagreeing with. Then, once you can actually state his position in a way that he would recognize as accurate, then disagree as much as you please.
"epistemic closure" is a phrase that bored philosophy majors use to try and disparage their opponents on political grounds. I should know, I'm a bored philosophy major. now would you kindly speak to me like a real person?
I submit that you were not. You were in fact speaking like a person whose mind is made up, and who thinks that everyone else's mind should also be made up, and there's nothing that's even worth talking about or considering. I'm not a philosophy major, bored or otherwise, but that's rather close to my understanding of "epistemic closure". (Ah, however, actually looking up the term shows that it means something rather different. My bad.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguing that the whole list is less credible because Friedman's on it? I mean, it's fine if you want to maintain your own epistemic closure, but expecting everyone else to agree? And even you should read him, if for no other reason to be sure you understand what you're disagreeing with. Then, once you can actually state his position in a way that he would recognize as accurate, then disagree as much as you please.
Saying the list took a dive when it came to Friedman is colorful writing and not epistemic closure . It did take a dive. This is 2016 and Friedman has been around for ever. He's been insistently wrong over and over again. The Iraq War. He was so wrong about that he even has a measurement unit named after him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_Unit He's on TV, he's in the NYTimes, he's on NPR, he has a book. Am I…
I mean, no, I'm not going to read Friedman's book. No, I'm not a fan. No, I'm not defending his positions. It's fine that you don't agree with Friedman. I don't agree with stoicism, either. But deciding that the list "took a dive" just because he has a book on it? Yes, you're being closed minded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you recommend an alternative?
Hillbilly Elegy is excellent and touches on some of the points, but really just read conservatives. We're not exactly shy about what we don't like about modern liberalism. Go peruse the pages of National Review or Commentary Magazine.
My personal picks as I continue to try to understand global economic trends since the 1980's through the prism of the 2008-crash: The Global Minotaur: America, Europe and the Future of the Global Economy by Yanis Varoufakis [1] The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future By Stiglitz, Joseph E. [2] The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War by Ro…
This is my favorite passage from Titan: With a talent for seeing things anew, Rockefeller could study an operation, break it down into component parts, and devise ways to improve it. In many ways, he anticipated the efficiency studies of engineer Frederick Winslow Taylor. Regarding each plant as infinitely perfectible, he created an atmosphere of ceaseless improvement. Paradoxically, the mammoth scale of operations e…
Sounds like all my bosses squeezing pay and hours. "You are working until 5:30, could you work until 6? 6:30? 7?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"epistemic closure" is a phrase that bored philosophy majors use to try and disparage their opponents on political grounds. I should know, I'm a bored philosophy major. now would you kindly speak to me like a real person?
Well, I don't know. Were you speaking to us like we're real people when you dismissed Friedman as automatically worthy of extreme aversion, without even bothering to give any explanation or justification? Were you even speaking of Friedman like a real person? I submit that you were not. You were in fact speaking like a person whose mind is made up, and who thinks that everyone else's mind should also be made up, and…
that's exactly what I meant. it's an opinion. it's not a claim of any kind of universal truth. it's a statement of taste and therefore does not require justification. I didn't anywhere say "automatically worthy of...". You said that. You're trying to put words in my mouth, which is a discredited rhetorical trick.
you are really getting carried away with word games. knock it off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess if you considered the link I provided a "content-free screed" then I'm not sure what to say. Your example was not a good characterization of the review.
I read the review. Mostly, it seemed to be summarizing the book. Then, as the OP noted, there are a few nitpicks of phrasing. Would you care to summarize the review?
My personal picks as I continue to try to understand global economic trends since the 1980's through the prism of the 2008-crash: The Global Minotaur: America, Europe and the Future of the Global Economy by Yanis Varoufakis [1] The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future By Stiglitz, Joseph E. [2] The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War by Ro…
I think you would enjoy "How Nations Fail" by Acemoglu and Robinson, and the EconTalk podcast with Russ Roberts.