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

Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

tech.fortune.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 342 posts

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#331

Post by bad_user »

Jach wrote: post #326
bad_user wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religion to me is any kind of belief without questioning, without observable proof. Books, worship, in-group perks, rituals, supernatural; are just side-effects and the scale of it depends on the ability of its leaders to bullshit people. I'm not an atheist btw - that also requires belief and too much energy. As I'm too lazy to answer the question " does God exist or not? " guess that makes me an agnostic - and truly…

Just as long as you realize you're using uncommon terminology with respect to 'religion'. I'd rather term faith-based thinking as religious-thinking (or religious-esque), but it's certainly not unique to religion, and some irrational atheists also suffer from it... (I'd also ask how many bits of evidence about a belief you require before you take something as proof but that's fairly off-topic..) In regards to the god…

You know, the problem with God is that it isn't really a falsifiable notion; but here's something to chew on ...

Do you admit the possibility that tomorrow, based on weird but explainable phenomenons, molecules in the air might collide and materialize a tuna-sandwitch right before your eyes? Think about it - possibility is so close to zero that intuition would tell you that it is impossible.

And yet atheists are ready to admin that this wonderful and full of life world that we live in (which is a lot more complex than a tuna-sandwich btw) - came into being by way of some kind of cosmic accident that we'll never understand, with our universe instantly expanding, forming lots of hydrogen-burning stars and rocks of all shapes and sizes - and somehow on one of these rocks, carbon-based life not only happened, but it also gave birth to sentience.

This story is even more unlikely to happen than a tuna-sandwich integrating right before your eyes tomorrow, or having a man in red suit driving a sleigh with flying reindeers and yet we consider it natural because it already happened.

That's why I said atheism also requires faith.

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#332

Post by kevbin »

Jach wrote: post #289
darkandbrooding wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple is a religion." I find the "cult of apple" and "apple is a religion" memes amusing because, including myself, the majority of Apple users that I know are atheists. Personally, I think "spectator sports" makes for more constructive analogies than religion. People develop very strong associations to their favorite rugby/football/etc team, delight in their team's victories, and bemoan their losses. Some people ch…

I wish I could upvote you more. "X is a religion" should only be valid when X categorically resembles a religion--books, worship, in-group perks, rituals, supernatural, the lot. Your sports team analogy is great.

The old testament: http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Inside-Macintosh-Volumes-III/dp/...

The new testament: http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Macintosh-Apple-Computer-Inc/dp...

The book of common prayer: http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-C...

The dead sea scrolls: http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Reference-Manual-Computers-030-0...

The Apocrypha: http://www.amazon.com/Newton-2-0-User-Interface-Guidelines/d...

Deuterocanonical: http://www.amazon.com/OpenDoc-Programmers-Guide-Apple-Comput...

Dianetics: http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/ui_guidelines/i...

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#335

Post by mreine »

rbarooah wrote: post #318
bane wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#2 Since the iPad 2 wasn't shipping at all, its volume is 0 at the time this was said. That much is inarguable, full stop. Ergo it is a lie. #3 Provide documentation then, don't guess. Since you're obviously an Apple fan (not saying there is anything wrong with that), guessing will only provide numbers and situations that you want -- confirmation bias. For it not to be a lie, Apple must own not 88% of the market, not…

"#2 Since the iPad 2 wasn't shipping at all, its volume is 0 at the time this was said. That much is inarguable, full stop. Ergo it is a lie." No, he said when it was going to ship. It's a prediction. It's only a lie if he has good reason to believe that the won't ship in volume .

I listened to the audio and he clearly states a lie "ipad2 is the first dual core tablet to ship in volume". A bold faced lie.

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#336

Post by mreine »

Stormbringer wrote: post #330
Dylanlacey wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of it is pushing back on fanboyism. Neither are logical or sensible, but I believe one begets the other. If you don't overly care about Apple and the only news you hear is either "Apple did this" and "I WANT APPLES BABIES", you will start to form an overly critical view, because the news seems to always tend towards hype. And then some people (with the same fanboyish mindset as the fanboys) will start to take it…

Exactly zero of the 'raging Apple fanboys' that I know go around telling people that they are bad people because they don't use Apple products. A few Apple fanboys get a bit 'preachy' about how 'awesome' Apple is when they first switch, but I've never seen an Apple fanboy call somebody a bad person as part of that process. Additionally, this desire to 'win souls' quickly wears off, and some never go through it at all…

you say "Exactly zero of the 'raging Apple fanboys' that I know go around telling people that they are bad people because they don't use Apple products." Well then you obviously have never met a mac zealot. Every and I mean EVERY person I have ever met that has a mac or iphone constantly berates windows users and especially android users. I can only postulate that is due to their insecurity and general lack of social grace or the fact that they are complete idiots.

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#338

Post by Jach »

bad_user wrote: post #331
Jach wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as long as you realize you're using uncommon terminology with respect to 'religion'. I'd rather term faith-based thinking as religious-thinking (or religious-esque), but it's certainly not unique to religion, and some irrational atheists also suffer from it... (I'd also ask how many bits of evidence about a belief you require before you take something as proof but that's fairly off-topic..) In regards to the god…

You know, the problem with God is that it isn't really a falsifiable notion; but here's something to chew on ... Do you admit the possibility that tomorrow, based on weird but explainable phenomenons, molecules in the air might collide and materialize a tuna-sandwitch right before your eyes? Think about it - possibility is so close to zero that intuition would tell you that it is impossible. And yet atheists are read…

Eh, I'll spend a little karma. I believe the laws of physics, and it's the laws of physics which make the spontaneity of sandwich-appearance much less likely than the arising of homo sapiens based on billions of years of causality we have determined experimentally and then many many years of the very mathematical process of evolution. The big bang theory has some issues, but the idea that things were once really close together and now are expanding at an accelerating rate is pretty nailed down. Evolutionary theory is similarly nailed down, I believe both those propositions with a fairly high number of bits. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong, but not by merit of the possibility that I could be wrong. Not all possibilities are equal.

Can you point to some atheists who are as you say? As an atheist I've never considered this a particularly wonderful and full of life world (sure I like it and want to preserve parts of it but there's a lot of improvement to be made) nor have I considered the mysteries of the universe are incomprehensible. We are as Sagan said "the universe trying to understand itself".

You may say our lives coming into being by the known fundamental laws of physics is as unlikely as Santa existing, but here we are, the evidence is actually in front of us, humans and quantum mechanics. I've never seen Santa, yet I've seen humans and studied some QM.

Edit: oh hey, I almost forgot. http://lesswrong.com/lw/i8/religions_claim_to_be_nondisprova... "The earliest account I know of a scientific experiment is, ironically, the story of Elijah and the priests of Baal."

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#339

Post by jodrellblank »

tomjen3 wrote: post #301
jodrellblank wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The social level who can afford to buy apple? A Toughbook costs more than a comparable MBP.

And insurance costs more than not having it, but the poorer you are, the more you need it. So yeah, it is maybe more expensive but I can totally see why you would want that.

I can see why you would want it as well, but if you can afford it then you are in the social group who "can afford Apple".

(As long as toughbook refers to Panasonic Toughbook brand, if there is a cheap laptop marketed as durable that would make a difference.)

Re: Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth

#340

Post by nlogn »

bad_user wrote: post #311
Jach wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could upvote you more. "X is a religion" should only be valid when X categorically resembles a religion--books, worship, in-group perks, rituals, supernatural, the lot. Your sports team analogy is great.

Religion to me is any kind of belief without questioning, without observable proof. Books, worship, in-group perks, rituals, supernatural; are just side-effects and the scale of it depends on the ability of its leaders to bullshit people. I'm not an atheist btw - that also requires belief and too much energy. As I'm too lazy to answer the question " does God exist or not? " guess that makes me an agnostic - and truly…

If you cannot honestly make this claim: "I believe in god/s", you are an atheist by definition. You may not be a strong atheist which is someone who would make the claim: "There is/are no god/s", but you are still an atheist (a weak atheist, which anecdotally appears to be the most common variety). Just think about the roots, atheism - without theism.

You're also an agnostic if you can honestly make the claim: "It is unknowable whether or not there is/are god/s".

I used to call myself an agnostic because, for whatever reason, people always assume that if you are an atheist you hold the position that there are no gods (which you also seem to hold given your assumption that atheism is a position that requires belief).

Post reply on HN