Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My new favorite book of all time

gatesnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 421 posts

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#131

Post by dorian-graph »

JorgeGT wrote: post #72

> Time spent doing laundry fell from 11.5 hours a week in 1920 to an hour and a half in 2014. This might sound trivial in the grand scheme of progress. But the rise of the washing machine has improved quality of life by freeing up time for people—mostly women—to enjoy other pursuits. This. I remember following Reddit AMAs of two centenarian women, women who remembered SS troops arriving at their village, who watched…

I saw this first-hand in the Philippines. The women had to spend so much time washing clothes by hand. It's also a reminder that it's not over, there are still huge amounts of people around the world yet to benefit from these inventions.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#132

Post by rpedela »

chippy wrote: post #86
bryanlarsen wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He encourages us to assume that progress is fragile, is not automatically improving and that we need to be active in defending our freedoms, our progress and the things we take for granted." But would Pinker or Bill Gates disagree with that statement? I don't think so. Bill Gates is devoting his fortune to doing so, and is doing so very effectively. And even if Pinker is wrong, I believe his message is much more lik…

Yes, I don't think that view was expressed in Gray's article about Pinker. But I imagine that there could be an implication that "if the data shows the world is improving, it always will do, progress happens one way and is always going up" which Gray takes issue to. Why act if everything is getting better anyhow?

Why act like the world isn't getting better if it actually is?

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#133

Post by rjkennedy98 »

Letmesleep69 wrote: post #105
rjkennedy98 wrote: post #92

This article/video explains why so many people have completely lost faith in our technocratic elite. The idea that "You’re 37 times less likely to be killed by a bolt of lightning than you were at the turn of the century" makes a large difference in the happiness of people is ridiculous. Why are people pessimistic about the future? Maybe its because the rates of addiction (including to smart phones and other screens)…

> The idea that "You’re 37 times less likely to be killed by a bolt of lightning than you were at the turn of the century" makes a large difference in the happiness of people is ridiculous. I believe he put that in as an interesting, somewhat unexpected benefit of modern life. His next few arguments are what really backs up his points. > Maybe its because rates of marriage and church attendance are on the decline. As…

Dickens was the most popular entertainer of his time. Shakespeare was widely popular as well. Both are considered too difficult for most audiences now days. Can you imagine a writer like Dickens being the most popular in contemporary America or in the UK? Our most popular figure is Kim Kardashian.

And my point about the Church was not to say that religion is all good, but to point to the fact that people are disconnected from communities. UK just hired a Minister of Loneliness. Its a serious issue.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#134

Post by bildung »

Fricken wrote: post #40

Pew research did a survey where it asked 42,000 people in 38 different nations how their day was. Respondents could answer 'particularly good', 'typical', or 'particulary bad'. Nigerians are having the best time, with 73% of respondents saying they were having a particularly good day. In Japan on 11% were having a particularly good day. The outcomes of this pew study correlate inversely with studies that objectively…

Interesting! Amartya Sen's theory of justice had a similar passage about quality of live of Indian women: Originally they self-assessed as healthy and without problems (while objectively being in very poor condition and having very low life expectancy), then, years later, as both education (esp. health-related) and access to healthcare improved, self-assessed as unhealthier than before! Turns out they didn't know/ couldn't imagine their health problems as something optimizable. Life just was how it was, alternatives not imaginable.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#135

Post by marnett »

adventured wrote: post #91
kiliantics wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could easily argue that most of the conflict the US is currently involved in - and there are many! with boots on the ground or otherwise[0] - have some motive involving petrodollar or other resources. [0] https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-09-16/us-now-involved-134-w...

So let me see if I have this straight. Highly respected, four star general, Wesley Clark says that the Iraq war was about attempting to strip Russian influence out of the Middle East. That the plan was to knock over several of the dictatorships there, which were overwhelmingly friendly toward Russia and hostile toward the US and its allies. You're saying it was about oil primarily. Yet the US didn't take Iraq's oil.…

> vaporized a trillion dollars

It didn't vaporize any money whatsoever, in fact, Halliburton (and many of the hundreds of military strategy companies in the MIC) did quite well with their new economy.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#136

Post by dragonwriter »

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #133
Letmesleep69 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that "You’re 37 times less likely to be killed by a bolt of lightning than you were at the turn of the century" makes a large difference in the happiness of people is ridiculous. I believe he put that in as an interesting, somewhat unexpected benefit of modern life. His next few arguments are what really backs up his points. > Maybe its because rates of marriage and church attendance are on the decline. As…

Dickens was the most popular entertainer of his time. Shakespeare was widely popular as well. Both are considered too difficult for most audiences now days. Can you imagine a writer like Dickens being the most popular in contemporary America or in the UK? Our most popular figure is Kim Kardashian. And my point about the Church was not to say that religion is all good, but to point to the fact that people are disconne…

> Dickens was the most popular entertainer of his time. Shakespeare was widely popular as well. Both are considered too difficult for most audiences now days.

Difficult largely because of the relatively rapid rate of drift in English idiom (which is a unique feature of English); but less popular largely not because of difficulty but drift in taste for entertainment media which is more about shifting fashion than any issue with capacity.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#137

Post by haberman »

chippy wrote: post #86
bryanlarsen wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He encourages us to assume that progress is fragile, is not automatically improving and that we need to be active in defending our freedoms, our progress and the things we take for granted." But would Pinker or Bill Gates disagree with that statement? I don't think so. Bill Gates is devoting his fortune to doing so, and is doing so very effectively. And even if Pinker is wrong, I believe his message is much more lik…

Yes, I don't think that view was expressed in Gray's article about Pinker. But I imagine that there could be an implication that "if the data shows the world is improving, it always will do, progress happens one way and is always going up" which Gray takes issue to. Why act if everything is getting better anyhow?

Though I can't find a reference right now, I am pretty sure Pinker repeatedly and emphatically disavows any claim that progress will inevitably continue. There is no doubt we have to work for it.

Pinker's work is a rebuttal to people who want to paint the world as hopelessly bad right now.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#139

Post by munificent »

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #92

This article/video explains why so many people have completely lost faith in our technocratic elite. The idea that "You’re 37 times less likely to be killed by a bolt of lightning than you were at the turn of the century" makes a large difference in the happiness of people is ridiculous. Why are people pessimistic about the future? Maybe its because the rates of addiction (including to smart phones and other screens)…

As always, when critiquing someone, the Principle of Charity should apply.

> The idea that "You’re 37 times less likely to be killed by a bolt of lightning than you were at the turn of the century" makes a large difference in the happiness of people is ridiculous.

Obviously, no one but an idiot would claim quantity of lightning strikes is a key asked of human happiness. The fact that you presume Pinker is stupid enough to make this claim may say more about you (or the thoughtfulness of your argument) than Pinker.

Instead, the charitable interpretation is that lightning strikes are a great proxy for "random bad thing that can happen to people". If we're better able to survive lightning strikes, we're likely better able to survive lots of other unpredictable misfortunes.

Re: My new favorite book of all time

#140

Post by jahnu »

mseebach wrote: post #126
pron wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinker is much more nefarious (and you can know that by going to his talks, as I have, where he's more loose-tongued than in his books). He places such emphasis on the fact that the world is getting better as a rebuttal to "complainers" and political activists . The problem is not with his premise but with his conclusion. The world has been getting better (to the extent that it has) because people complain and are di…

There is a certain rather loud, rather fashionable kind of "activist" who are if not directly claiming that everything is awful, then strongly evoking symbolism and imagery to that effect. To fix this, they want to take broad, radical action, basically to affect revolution. This approach is indefensible given the actual state of the world, and these activists are either confused about the facts, or cynically manipula…

Any examples of this kind of activist? Are they particularly common?
Post reply on HN