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

Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 354 posts

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#251

Post by mfringel »

jimmy1 wrote: post #200
themoonbus wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The previous generation you're referring to is one that actively discriminated against women and people of color in the work force... probably wasn't hard for them to keep politics out of the work place because there was more homogeneity. Discriminating against those who hold discriminatory views is different than discriminating against people based on their ethnicity or gender. And yes, I fully understand that what…

> The previous generation you're referring to is one that actively discriminated against women and people of color in the work force. Some part of the previous generation did that. Some, obviously, did not, just as some part of the current generation continue to do that, and some do not. In some cases there is a real, legitimate argument that the discrimination has reversed -- there is a lot of discrimination and exc…

It appears you're saying that only "100%" and "0%" states are distinguishable from each other, and that the universe of the superposition of states boils down to "some do and some do not", which are all indistinguishable from each other.

Can you clarify that that's what you're asserting? That's what it looks like, and I sincerely hope I'm wrong, because that's a very weird hill to defend.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#252

Post by Kalium »

ryderm wrote: post #239
Kalium wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know! You're incredibly right! It's seems impossible that so many smart, educated, talented, passionate, hard-working people could fail to solve any problem they put their minds to! Yet, might it be worth considering that any individual human brain could potentially be less than infinitely malleable in all possible aspects? I have known blindingly brilliant artists who are utterly repulsed by basic arithmetic, and…

> but this critic is almost certainly making perfect the enemy of good in pursuit of an ideal. Yes, because "good" means preventable poverty related deaths by the millions because it is not profitable to do anything about it \s. Good for you != good, but it is easy to look past that when it isn't right in your face

You're right. It's incredibly easy to ignore things that aren't immediately in front of me. Like the human rights abuses ongoing in China, which aren't really part of my immediate daily life and I don't generally think about much.

With that said, is it possible that this passage could be interpreted more charitably? Perhaps some might read it as a comment on how demanding perfection can cause more negative effects while seeking to prevent negative effects.

For example, where might our technology be if our species had refused to extract or smelt metals until we had the ability to do so without any emissions of any sort?

It's not about what real preventable human tragedies can be averted, but aren't, because of the evils of human greed you wisely point to. It's about accepting that imperfect improvements to alleviate human pain and reducing human lives lost can, sometimes, be preferable to hoping for perfection at some future date.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#254

Post by guscost »

typomatic wrote: post #185
ams6110 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh well let's not throw corporations under the bus entirely. Corporate organization allows people to work together to take risks and tackle problems that are too big for individuals. This has given us the modern technology upon which most of us here earn our livings and given us huge advances in health and standard of living. Have corporations done bad things? Of course, and so they are regulated, and there are proce…

Are you serious? There's a better way to work together to take risks and tackle problems that are too big for individuals, and it's called "government": the original corporation that won't sell your grandmother to a meat company for a quarter.

Ah government, the "original corporation" that occasionally decides your grandmother is a problem, organizes a pogrom, and shoots her.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#255

Post by coolaliasbro »

Kalium wrote: post #228
hasbroslasher wrote: post #210

It's true that ultimately there aren't a whole lot of morally "good" things you can do with your compsci degree at the moment. You can work in adtech or building corporate software, ecommerce, etc. to sell plastic trinkets to people and raise your company's stock price. Or you can do ML, which will probably hurt poor people in the near to mid term and probably contribute somewhat to the more Orwellian aspects of mode…

I know! You're incredibly right! It's seems impossible that so many smart, educated, talented, passionate, hard-working people could fail to solve any problem they put their minds to! Yet, might it be worth considering that any individual human brain could potentially be less than infinitely malleable in all possible aspects? I have known blindingly brilliant artists who are utterly repulsed by basic arithmetic, and…

What do you believe to be the cause of that abject poverty?

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#256

Post by CamperBob2 »

ryderm wrote: post #231
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing the right thing — not what’s profitable or power enhancing — isn’t what business is about. In part that is because survival and solvency are quite difficult in the details; and in part that is because doing “good” requires a much richer concept of what you are doing than is required by being profitable and placating shareholders. It’s easier to get it wrong, harder to say when you’re done and can move resources…

> Doing the right thing — not what’s profitable or power enhancing — isn’t what business is about. If only society / the global economic system wasn't set up to incentive profit over all else....

Any better suggestions?

Ones that actually work as intended in the general case, and don't frequently malfunction by getting a bunch of people exiled, consigned to real poverty, or killed?

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#257

Post by coolaliasbro »

Kalium wrote: post #252
ryderm wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but this critic is almost certainly making perfect the enemy of good in pursuit of an ideal. Yes, because "good" means preventable poverty related deaths by the millions because it is not profitable to do anything about it \s. Good for you != good, but it is easy to look past that when it isn't right in your face

You're right. It's incredibly easy to ignore things that aren't immediately in front of me. Like the human rights abuses ongoing in China, which aren't really part of my immediate daily life and I don't generally think about much. With that said, is it possible that this passage could be interpreted more charitably? Perhaps some might read it as a comment on how demanding perfection can cause more negative effects wh…

But how would our species conceive of the idea of emissions and the effects thereof without first creating emissions and observing their effects?

I think the issue has more to do with the Cassandra effect and the tendencies of some to not consider or want to act on potentially catastrophic situations if they believe it imperils their own more immediate well-being or status.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#258

Post by starpilot »

hasbroslasher wrote: post #210

It's true that ultimately there aren't a whole lot of morally "good" things you can do with your compsci degree at the moment. You can work in adtech or building corporate software, ecommerce, etc. to sell plastic trinkets to people and raise your company's stock price. Or you can do ML, which will probably hurt poor people in the near to mid term and probably contribute somewhat to the more Orwellian aspects of mode…

The effective altruism perspective is to make as money as possible doing whatever, then use that to fund noble causes. At the individual level it's the Wall Street quant who donates his income. At the corporate level, it's FB using ad money to create the Chan-Zuckerberg Intiative to cure cancer.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#259

Post by ForHackernews »

illumin8 wrote: post #220
hasbroslasher wrote: post #210

It's true that ultimately there aren't a whole lot of morally "good" things you can do with your compsci degree at the moment. You can work in adtech or building corporate software, ecommerce, etc. to sell plastic trinkets to people and raise your company's stock price. Or you can do ML, which will probably hurt poor people in the near to mid term and probably contribute somewhat to the more Orwellian aspects of mode…

You can work on blockchain projects that might have the potential to bring financial services to the unbanked and poor in 3rd world countries, but, oh wait a minute, the technology will probably just be used to create predatory financial products for payday lenders to expand their market... The best way to make sure you are working on ethical projects is to start and run your own company. Any technology can be used f…

Even aside from the financial scams, any proof-of-work blockchain project is an ecological obscenity.

Re: Tech Workers Now Want to Know: What Are We Building This For?

#260

Post by clubm8 »

hasbroslasher wrote: post #210

It's true that ultimately there aren't a whole lot of morally "good" things you can do with your compsci degree at the moment. You can work in adtech or building corporate software, ecommerce, etc. to sell plastic trinkets to people and raise your company's stock price. Or you can do ML, which will probably hurt poor people in the near to mid term and probably contribute somewhat to the more Orwellian aspects of mode…

I think there's a lot of good, moral work out there.

I have a friend who's a security engineer at a bank. I was surprised when he took the job - he'd always been pretty to the left politically.

But he takes pride in making sure the grandmas of the world don't get their accounts drained. He realizes he's not saving the world, but he's not swapping around debt vouchers until the economy crashes.

It's counter intuitive, but in his mind he's more moral than someone working at Google or Facebook.

(He also brags to me about the vacation - apparently they're encouraged to take their time for anti-fraud reasons?)

Post reply on HN