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

People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

freakonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 453 posts

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#231

Post by rogerbinns »

Symmetry wrote: post #192
gdubs wrote: post #95

Reminded of this timeless Carl Sagan quote: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

Our civilization has attained its complexity by encompassing such knowledge that it would take a million lifetimes to learn all of it. I have made my career learning about technology and learning about science is a great hobby of mine. But I have only the dimmest understanding of even how much there is to know.

That is fine! In economics there is a famous essay I, Pencil[1] explaining that no one knows how to make a pencil. Sure you put some graphite in some wood, but how do you make graphite? And how do you make the machines that make it. And how do you make the components that go into that. Or updating this, no one knows how to make a computer mouse. (You'd need some hydro-carbons for the plastic, machines, machines that make machines etc.)

In reality people know bits about small bits (think of every person involved in making a mouse back through all materials). And yet without coordination these folks all collaborated to make a mouse. I'm an optimist because people all over the world are making the world better. The rate at which it is happening is picking up, and in general benefiting more and more people. We use communication (including Amazon and Facebook), markets, social movements, regulation etc as feedback loops to find and improve.

The one thing I can guarantee is that there will keep being more to understand, and that as an individual you will keep understanding a smaller and smaller proportion of it.

I enjoy perpectives from Matt Ridley about this (eg The Rational Optimist book) and his Ted talk[2]. A nice tidbit is that King Louis XIV of France had about 500 people preparing meals for him each night. You can go to town and have the same, with far better food and service than he had. By historic standards, we live like royalty, all because we don't understand everything.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I,_Pencil

[2] https://www.ted.com/talks/matt_ridley_when_ideas_have_sex

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#232

Post by crpatino »

pascalxus wrote: post #165

I understand that a nobel peace prize winner can NOT say that people are dumb. However, there are people on this planet that believe the earth is flat.

Well, there are people on this forum who do not seem to grasp the difference between lacking intelligence and holding a false belief, so there is that.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#233

Post by delecti »

Symmetry wrote: post #192
gdubs wrote: post #95

Reminded of this timeless Carl Sagan quote: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

Our civilization has attained its complexity by encompassing such knowledge that it would take a million lifetimes to learn all of it. I have made my career learning about technology and learning about science is a great hobby of mine. But I have only the dimmest understanding of even how much there is to know.

I've been bingeing my way through a youtube channel [1] that's largely focused on old/outdated consumer technology. I'm astounded by how little I knew about how any of it worked. In particular, I was astonished when I watched the one about how VHS tapes works. There's just so much knowledge underpinning even relatively obsolete technology. As time goes on the fantasy trope of "ancient lost knowledge" becomes less hard to understand. In a hundred years will anyone know how a VHS works? Or how they encoded color information alongside a backwards compatible black-and-white analog TV signal (IMO another incredible feat)?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCy0tKL1T7wFoYcxCe0xjN6Q

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#234

Post by rebuilder »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #187
ucaetano wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are more rational when the cost to them of being irrational is larger. This isn't strictly true, and I'd love to see you provide extensive data on such a exceptional claim. There is a lot of evidence showing that harsher punitive measures often have little to no impact on crime and wrongdoing.

If your choice is between death and jail, or if your life is not significantly better than jail, the duration of incarceration isn't going to matter to you at all. I'd be willing to bet that harsher punitive measures (and more aggressive enforcement) would have a big impact on white collar crime rates.

I would guess that a higher chance of being caught would be a greater deterrent to first-time white collar offenders than harsher punishment.

I spent 6 months in prison as a conscientous objector. One thing I learned was, in the relatively humane nordic penal system, the reality of imprisonment was nowhere near as scary as I'd imagined. If I were to commit a serious crime now, I think the social stigma would be much more serious to me than incarceration, were I to be caught. I think that's probably true for most white-collar types as well. Losing time is one thing, losing standing among your peers is much worse, if you have standing to lose. Shame is a terrible thing. It wasn't an issue for me, fortunately.

Of course, most people in prison don't have the luxury of such problems. The majority of people I met inside were there as a result of psychological and substance abuse issues. One man there reassured me that I was going to be OK because unlike everyone else there, my problems were not with my self. That's got to be about the saddest thing I've ever heard.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#235

Post by taeric »

hutzlibu wrote: post #213
taeric wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oddly, I think if you were to take that in a slightly different direction, you'd get more traction. Specifically, take your * and have it say * by "people" I mean collections of people. Individuals often show remarkable intelligence. Even that, of course, ignores that there is some wisdom in crowds. I'd guess there is a sense of "inertia" in how people behave/think. With more people, more inertia. Slower changes and…

You got me wrong. I never said that groups in general are stupid. I meant specifically a average group of average people today. And stupid in the sense that they fail to see any big picture(and also the picture in front of their eyes is usually quite blurry). Quite problematic in a globalised world.

Apologies, I meant that I am more open to the other interpretation. My hypothesis being that I am like most people. :) (Obvious flaws in said hypothesis.)

I don't necessarily think either interpretation is correct. I am curious on just how correct either are. That is, I suspect this is purely a probabilities thing. If that makes sense.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#236

Post by ItsMe000001 »

realitygrill wrote: post #194
dqpb wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that economists are good at maximizing resource allocation as they largely ignore externalities.

but economists invented the term "externalities" and the analysis of such..

How good are they, especially with dealing with the unknown unknowns to quote a famous contemporary American philosopher (/s)? Even for the known unknowns, they have to make assumptions to start somewhere. Yes, they create a lot of models for all kinds of stuff, and I'm sure all those models work out well.

I must say though that I have doubts about the parent's "they largely ignore externalities", I think that is too negative a claim.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#237

Post by aantix »

stingraycharles wrote: post #209
jonsen wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He will get away with small talk.

Ok normally I don’t approve of these types of comments on HN, but this was witty. For those who do not get the reference, Alan Kay is the inventor of SmallTalk: http://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/

I love how you revealed that you dislike joke comments on HN and unintentionally killed it at the same time.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#238

Post by avip »

enraged_camel wrote: post #109
gdubs wrote: post #95

Reminded of this timeless Carl Sagan quote: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

Asimov’s Foundation series is an excellent commentary on this very phenomenon. One of the antagonists is a galactic empire that is technologically advanced, but has been stagnating and decaying slowly as those in power start viewing scientists with disdain and distrust. Over time the empire loses the ability to develop new technology, and ends up with those who can only maintain/repair existing technology (which even…

Profession also discusses the same theme and it's shorter (IMO his best short story, and in a way prophecies how modern SW development works).

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#239

Post by Magmatic »

DesiLurker wrote: post #158
ppeetteerr wrote: post #34

This is probably the greatest argument for big government. If we were to eliminate the supervision of the establishment over the safety and security of everyday life, it would be very time consuming to handle every single aspect of it. There is always the issue of an overreaching government, and that's where the left/right party split comes in. Each party either creates more regulation and protection or take some awa…

My preferred solution for governance problems is basically to have smaller governing units (nations/states/districts). this gives people better representation and is pretty effective in managing the 'tyranny of the majority'. considering the environment in US today the majority is essentially 51%. Now if one considers how bi-polar favorite policies for each side has become, it (mandate) is nowhere near enough to just…

We could also collapse the yes/no questions with better voting systems, something not first pass the post.

While local government is totally necessary, I don't think we can afford to not have big government. If wind currents made air pollution a non-issue in say, Ontario because wind currents blew it all down to Nebraska, how would we deal with that? Many of our most pressing societal problems live at the interstate or international level and need a corresponding governing body.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#240

Post by rebuilder »

raywalters wrote: post #117

Having worked front line technical support, I have to disagree. People are indeed dumb, many choose to stay that way.

There's a difference between being dumb and being ignorant. Most people aren't dumb, they could learn to handle their technical issues if they were motivated to spend the time. But time is valuable, and if you can have a specialist handle your problems for you, is it really worth the trouble of learning and keeping up to date on something that doesn't really interest you?
Post reply on HN