Live data from Hacker News

Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

theatlantic.com

21–30 of 190 posts

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#21
post #9

Not sure what the point of all this is. Thousands of very smart, accomplished men and women have gone through GenEd at Harvard without murdering multiple people. Personally I think Kaczynski was influenced more by his inability to get a date in his entire life.

>Personally I think Kaczynski was influenced more by his inability to get a date in his entire life. You should read his manifesto, the dude had some funky ideas about society and there's no excuse for murdering innocent poeple, but he does defend what he believes in very vigorously. He wasn't a man without an ideological backing.

Lots of murderers leave behind manifestos. For some reason, Kaczynski's has always been well-regarded by the media. This is a testament to its sheer political banality, rather than any "funkiness". The guy was sayin' what all the newsmen were merely thinking. "Cool!"

Now, Elliot Rodgers had a funky manifesto.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#22

> The "Bad" Parts of Technology Cannot Be Separated from the "Good" Parts. [1] I thought this was one of the most prophetic statement from his Technology Manifesto. Written in 1995, still true today. Take any technology, and you'll see it has been used for doing "good" things as well as "evil" things, and it's impossible for anyone to separate the two and enforce usage of only the "good" parts. Example: Drones. Used…

How is this prophetic rather than a long-tread subject?

Super obvious example are the well-publicized doubts of many scientists involved in inventing nuclear weapons.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#23

> The "Bad" Parts of Technology Cannot Be Separated from the "Good" Parts. [1] I thought this was one of the most prophetic statement from his Technology Manifesto. Written in 1995, still true today. Take any technology, and you'll see it has been used for doing "good" things as well as "evil" things, and it's impossible for anyone to separate the two and enforce usage of only the "good" parts. Example: Drones. Used…

I grew up in a fairly out of the way area in a red state, but we had this cool elective in high school called simply enough "Technology". We had AutoCAD, computers, little bridge building things, etc.

One of the few lessons that really stuck with me was when the teacher was discussing technology one day and one of the students grappled with this very philosophical point. Basically the posed it as something like "we should just ban technology X because people do bad things with it". This was 1998 (dating myself) so it isn't like computers were the force they are now in everyone's mind.

What unfolded is this basic discussion: people are the ones doing the bad things. Technology is just a force or thought multiplier. He explained it so well. It sort of clicked into my brain then and that discussion still sits pretty firm in my mind.

I don't think all technology can find inherently bad uses, but most of it can. Computers are at the heart of every military technology now other than explosives. Physics are at the heart of nuclear weapons. etc. etc.

I think Ted would have still did what he did. He was a narcissist at heart. He felt his view on it was somehow that much more special than the same view we arrived at in 1998 in my high school class in many ways.

That said, ill just leave this here and say I think this guy saw further into the future than most people ever have, but I see sentiments like this all over HN these days:

50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society without causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values.

51. The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#24
I don't mean to preach, but that is a damn good article, don't just read the comments, read it.

So many nuggets, particularly around the maturation process that is mentioned in college where one goes from having a "dualistic" perspective to learning that the world's environment is relative, what happens to to people who reject that view, etc.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#25

> The "Bad" Parts of Technology Cannot Be Separated from the "Good" Parts. [1] I thought this was one of the most prophetic statement from his Technology Manifesto. Written in 1995, still true today. Take any technology, and you'll see it has been used for doing "good" things as well as "evil" things, and it's impossible for anyone to separate the two and enforce usage of only the "good" parts. Example: Drones. Used…

How is this prophetic rather than a long-tread subject? Super obvious example are the well-publicized doubts of many scientists involved in inventing nuclear weapons.

[deleted]

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#26

> The "Bad" Parts of Technology Cannot Be Separated from the "Good" Parts. [1] I thought this was one of the most prophetic statement from his Technology Manifesto. Written in 1995, still true today. Take any technology, and you'll see it has been used for doing "good" things as well as "evil" things, and it's impossible for anyone to separate the two and enforce usage of only the "good" parts. Example: Drones. Used…

I grew up in a fairly out of the way area in a red state, but we had this cool elective in high school called simply enough "Technology". We had AutoCAD, computers, little bridge building things, etc. One of the few lessons that really stuck with me was when the teacher was discussing technology one day and one of the students grappled with this very philosophical point. Basically the posed it as something like "we s…

I think that Kaczynski's concerns over technology are different from those raised by your teacher. The issue isn't so much that technology can be put to bad uses, but that it changes how people engage with the world.

Analogical example: people might lie over the internet, but whether the internet has made relationships shallower is a different issue.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#27
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a fairly out of the way area in a red state, but we had this cool elective in high school called simply enough "Technology". We had AutoCAD, computers, little bridge building things, etc. One of the few lessons that really stuck with me was when the teacher was discussing technology one day and one of the students grappled with this very philosophical point. Basically the posed it as something like "we s…

I think that Kaczynski's concerns over technology are different from those raised by your teacher. The issue isn't so much that technology can be put to bad uses, but that it changes how people engage with the world. Analogical example: people might lie over the internet, but whether the internet has made relationships shallower is a different issue.

The world isn't static though. Evolution and environmental changes over time will cause people to change how they engage with the changing world.

This has happened long before human technology.

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#28

Not sure what the point of all this is. Thousands of very smart, accomplished men and women have gone through GenEd at Harvard without murdering multiple people. Personally I think Kaczynski was influenced more by his inability to get a date in his entire life.

Not sure what the point of all this is. Thousands of very smart, accomplished men and women have gone through date-less lives without murdering multiple people.

Newton, Nietzsche, Beethoven, Tesla, etc

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#29
post #14
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Personally I think Kaczynski was influenced more by his inability to get a date in his entire life. You should read his manifesto, the dude had some funky ideas about society and there's no excuse for murdering innocent poeple, but he does defend what he believes in very vigorously. He wasn't a man without an ideological backing.

That's pretty much "Say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." Lots of mentally ill people defend what they believe in very vigorously.

What's wrong with socialism?

Re: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber (2000)

#30
post #27
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that Kaczynski's concerns over technology are different from those raised by your teacher. The issue isn't so much that technology can be put to bad uses, but that it changes how people engage with the world. Analogical example: people might lie over the internet, but whether the internet has made relationships shallower is a different issue.

The world isn't static though. Evolution and environmental changes over time will cause people to change how they engage with the changing world. This has happened long before human technology.

So? His issue was with technologically induced behavioral change, not evolutionarily or environmentally induced behavioral change.
Post reply on HN