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

A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 452 posts

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#241

Post by rocqua »

swarnie_ wrote: post #225
simonh wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way to destroy an enemy nuclear weapon is by hitting it with one of your nuclear weapons. Add on top of that your other strategic targets and a reserve, and the fact that their calculation is the same as yours, and you can see where this is going.

With weapons distributed amongst all USSR holdings this implies the US was willing to nuke everything from Poland to north Vietnam.

Of course they would be. Nuking the USSR would involve resigning yourself to the murder of hundreds of millions. It also means accepting that the USSR will do whatever they can to retaliate with nukes.

In that context, you are already so resigned at killing others over your own safety, that hitting a few other countries is a no-brainer.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#242

Post by Draken93 »

I highly reccomend the Podcast "Your undivided attention" by Tristan Harris. Together with experts he explains very detailed, how algorithms and social media affect our society.

Big changes have been made trough technology. And many of those changes have a negativ impact on our society.

But I strongly believe that humanity can overcome those problems. Altough it may seem impossible from time to time.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#243

Post by OJFord »

wutbrodo wrote: post #232
fabianhjr wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He wasn't defending destroying the frames though Agreed > In modern developed countries we have social security benefits, health care and such, to varying degrees depending on the country, to try and make sure people don't starve like that. And the country with the highest GDP lacks anything other than the bare minimum social security and the article is very-USA centric. (Both China and Europe have a more stable so…

> the country with the highest GDP lacks anything other than the bare minimum social security and the article is very-USA centric. As with many similar topics, the US actually spends a much higher amount on social welfare than people realize, more than most developed countries. As always, it just does so uniquely inefficiently, for reasons that are complicated and possibly related to our sclerotic politics. https://w…

It would be oddly specific, IMO, to claim that a country doesn't spend enough on (for example) social security. What people actually talk about is outcomes.

Interesting that a lot is spent on it, but not really much of a counterpoint since, as you say, it's done so 'uniquely inefficiently' that the outcome remains less.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#244

Post by QuesnayJr »

slumpt_ wrote: post #192
Daho0n wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. Sure "the good old days" wasn't that good, but that doesn't mean he was completely wrong. >We have made untold advances in the medical sciences Out of reach of a lot of humanity and for those that can access it it is not without risks (just look at the medical devices debacle in the US). It also isn't as good as we often seem to believe. For example the US is number 7 in Deaths by heart attack b…

100% this. Too many folks gulped Pinker’s nonsense without further inspection because it suited their priors.

I feel like equally as many people rejected Pinker because it violated their priors.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other -- I guess my prior is that I am skeptical of broad narratives one way or the other and I think Pinker is prone to facile generalizations -- but most of the rebuttals I've seen to Pinker seem offended by the idea of progress, rather than taking his arguments seriously.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#245

Post by Cthulhu_ »

swarnie_ wrote: post #218
yesenadam wrote: post #216

> Has Tech Destroyed Society? I recently watched the documentary The Man Who Saved the World [0], about Stanislav Petrov, who one day in 1983 made the decision to ignore the early warning system computers telling him the USA had fired 5 missiles at the USSR.[1] It seems had he followed orders, a report to his superiors would have resulted in mass retaliation. The decision was in his hands. In the movie, as well as a…

> in 1985 the USA had 21,000+ nuclear weapons, USSR 39,000+. This is one of the facts from this era which seems completely irrational to me. Considering the damage each one of these devices can do why do you need so many. Lets presume you're in fact a genocidal maniac (i didn't say the roleplaying would be difficult America) 1 bomb per enemy military installation and 1 bomb per population centre over 100k population…

It'll kill the whole world - eventually, but for an effective first or second strike you want to take out the enemy as fast as possible, instead of wait for the fallout and climate change to take over.

Mind you, a single nuke on e.g. DC or NY would cripple the country already, especially if there's minimal warning.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#246

Post by marvin »

darkerside wrote: post #158
dimitrios1 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what I am saying at all. I mean for the sake of conversation and discussion, asking to even explain a belief, for understanding. Sometimes even the question is seemed as a threat. I didn't say I want to change anyone's mind. Wanting to have a discussion about important topics with loved ones isn't an instant trip down selfishness lane. I see what you are saying, but you jumped the gun a little bit.

Based on what you've said, I get the same impression. If you want to connect with somebody, don't talk. Listen. Even if you "know" you're right. As stubborn as you think those people are, they have a good case for arguing that you are just as stubborn if not more so.

Most people you'd disagree with generally have a point, if you get past the quick-release talking points. If one tries to have a genuine conversation, it might be surprising to many how much common ground can be found.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#247

Post by heidarb »

fabianhjr wrote: post #206
simonh wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasn't defending destroying the frames though, he was commiserating with the plight of the workers. In modern developed countries we have social security benefits, health care and such, to varying degrees depending on the country, to try and make sure people don't starve like that.

> He wasn't defending destroying the frames though Agreed > In modern developed countries we have social security benefits, health care and such, to varying degrees depending on the country, to try and make sure people don't starve like that. And the country with the highest GDP lacks anything other than the bare minimum social security and the article is very-USA centric. (Both China and Europe have a more stable so…

China does not have a stable society. You never hear about most of the social issues that happen inside China.

A country committing genocide against its own citizens is not a stable society.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#248

Post by [deleted] »

yesenadam wrote: post #239
kumarvvr wrote: post #73

It destroyed the average Joe's faith in the average Joe. Now, people are more separated than ever, in their echo chambers, hating each other and firmly believing they are better and righter than the other.

Where is this you're describing? The USA, or some part of the USA? Doesn't sound anything like my bubble, my city or my country. (Not the USA) I have heard that bleak description before, just never experienced it.

[deleted]

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#249

Post by bambax »

swarnie_ wrote: post #218
yesenadam wrote: post #216

> Has Tech Destroyed Society? I recently watched the documentary The Man Who Saved the World [0], about Stanislav Petrov, who one day in 1983 made the decision to ignore the early warning system computers telling him the USA had fired 5 missiles at the USSR.[1] It seems had he followed orders, a report to his superiors would have resulted in mass retaliation. The decision was in his hands. In the movie, as well as a…

> in 1985 the USA had 21,000+ nuclear weapons, USSR 39,000+. This is one of the facts from this era which seems completely irrational to me. Considering the damage each one of these devices can do why do you need so many. Lets presume you're in fact a genocidal maniac (i didn't say the roleplaying would be difficult America) 1 bomb per enemy military installation and 1 bomb per population centre over 100k population…

It doesn't have anything to do with efficiency. It's a pissing contest. You want the largest number because it gives you bragging rights.

Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?

#250

Post by imtringued »

tinus_hn wrote: post #187
lukedoolittle wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if this changes anything but I think the actual bet is described by the line >I bet you US$1,000 that in the year 2020, we're not even close to the kind of disaster you describe—a convergence of three disasters: global currency collapse, significant warfare between rich and poor, and environmental disasters of some significant size. We won't even be close. I'll bet on my optimism. It seems like in the ac…

How can there even be ‘significant warfare between rich and poor’? Some kind of communist revolution? By definition the poor don’t have the resources to significantly attack the rich.

I don't think that is true. You can have strength in numbers and mass violence is very difficult to stop without outright killing the perpetrators.
Post reply on HN