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

Technology Without Industry

geohot.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: Technology Without Industry

#41

Post by patcon »

Animats wrote: post #40

Biology is non-toxic. Biology is efficient. No, and no.

Speaking as a biochemist, I feel you're too quick to condemn based on what I would assume is an overly rigorous interpretations of these words.

I would assume, knowing what I know, and presuming what he knows -- He's not saying biology/nature has no toxins. He's saying biology by and large isn't toxic to ecological systems made of average biological components. And I feel he's more right than wrong.

The efficiency thing is only right in certain domains, but really interesting ones: e.g., (1) functional state of folded proteins being an exact match with the lowest energy conformational state that it's linear amino acid order allows, (2) ecology recycling everything and re-using it all without "waste", and stuff like that.

Re: Technology Without Industry

#42

Post by patcon »

barumrho wrote: post #27

Hmm, if you view biology as technology, isn't the ecosystem required for human life basically an industry in itself? It seems that centralization is the natural outcome of decentralization. We live in the tension in between the two extremes.

Really like your comment.

And yeah, even cephalization (e.g., evolution of "heads" in almost all species) is a neat artifact of this relentless concentration of power in even a single species. We rightfully cry out against human subjugation, but never cry out for the skin cell on the back of the fist we raise against that. But it's maybe similar processes taking place and emerging within different strata of matter

I'm genuinely not sure what to think of that...!

Re: Technology Without Industry

#43

Post by patcon »

arp242 wrote: post #11
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #10

>Biology is non-toxic. Biology is efficient. Biology is beautiful. Biology is technology. I have a huge problem, with especially the first two. Biology can be very toxic. Cobra snake venom is a product of biology. Cancer is a product of biology. Both can have horrific consequences for humans. Biology is not necessarily efficient. Take a look at pregnancy and birth and infancy. Before modern medicine and birth control…

Before that it mentioned "Human DNA is 6 GB", but a lot of that is junk and meaningless. "Dead code", so to speak. Hardly what I call efficient. There are plenty of weird things as well. Why can't humans synthesise vitamin C? My cat can; in fact, most animals can. But not humans and most other primates: we lost this ability. This is probably because at the time we didn't really need it as we got enough from dietary s…

Would you call a library inefficient? Miles and miles of books that no one is reading right now? And all that concrete and rebar that no one can read :)

Re: Technology Without Industry

#44

Post by ssivark »

avivo wrote: post #30

With all due respect George, I now disagree, even if I did agree in 2012 (when we road tripped together to SXSW; celebrating the destruction of SOPA!). I still think SOPA was terrible! But my broader thinking has dramatically evolved as I learned more about how technology and power interact in society. You assume a common fallacy that I often bring up on HN — the magical decentralization fallacy — "the mistaken belie…

I have never seen a convincing argument of the claim that decentralization creates worse outcomes for fighting disinformation.

I think decentralization/federation [1] strongly improves systemic stability by enabling diversity and a hearty turnover of a variety of different curation approaches towards content. The way I see it, even if there’s no powerful central authority (supposedly exploiting economies of scale) controlling the spread of disinformation, the lack of a curatorial monoculture intrinsically limits the reach/damage of parasites (and also reduces the value of “hacking” that oversight process, since the payoff/reach is limited). The monoculture of a large platform with homogeneous policies creates the problem in the first place, and then needs to solve it.

On top of this, especially when the fundamental problem is enforced homogeneity against the wishes of the people, centralized governance is never going to be a satisfactory solution, even with a constitution — because that requires the underlying values to be shared, and the population on the internet is too diverse for that.

[1]: Protocols rather than platforms https://knightcolumbia.org/content/protocols-not-platforms-a...

Re: Technology Without Industry

#45

Post by nathias »

avivo wrote: post #30

With all due respect George, I now disagree, even if I did agree in 2012 (when we road tripped together to SXSW; celebrating the destruction of SOPA!). I still think SOPA was terrible! But my broader thinking has dramatically evolved as I learned more about how technology and power interact in society. You assume a common fallacy that I often bring up on HN — the magical decentralization fallacy — "the mistaken belie…

I don't think many people are arguing that decentralization solves governance problems, only to solve them in a decentralized manner, because they aren't our biggest problems, centralization of power is.

Re: Technology Without Industry

#46

Post by mmmeff »

themark wrote: post #26

Isn’t this the dude that first cracked iOS? I was wondering what happened to him.

He invented the word "Jailbreak" and got kicked out of Rochester Institute of Technology for rewriting his student ID card with SQL injection to get into any room and get free food/drink from vending machines.

He's a legend.

Re: Technology Without Industry

#47

Post by hoseja »

patcon wrote: post #42
barumrho wrote: post #27

Hmm, if you view biology as technology, isn't the ecosystem required for human life basically an industry in itself? It seems that centralization is the natural outcome of decentralization. We live in the tension in between the two extremes.

Really like your comment. And yeah, even cephalization (e.g., evolution of "heads" in almost all species) is a neat artifact of this relentless concentration of power in even a single species. We rightfully cry out against human subjugation, but never cry out for the skin cell on the back of the fist we raise against that. But it's maybe similar processes taking place and emerging within different strata of matter I'…

And if you extrapolate it's easy to see we're bound for the fate of the skin cell.

Re: Technology Without Industry

#48

Post by hoseja »

patcon wrote: post #41
Animats wrote: post #40

Biology is non-toxic. Biology is efficient. No, and no.

Speaking as a biochemist, I feel you're too quick to condemn based on what I would assume is an overly rigorous interpretations of these words. I would assume, knowing what I know, and presuming what he knows -- He's not saying biology/nature has no toxins. He's saying biology by and large isn't toxic to ecological systems made of average biological components. And I feel he's more right than wrong. The efficiency th…

(1) isn't really true though, is it?

Re: Technology Without Industry

#50

Post by simonebrunozzi »

avivo wrote: post #30

With all due respect George, I now disagree, even if I did agree in 2012 (when we road tripped together to SXSW; celebrating the destruction of SOPA!). I still think SOPA was terrible! But my broader thinking has dramatically evolved as I learned more about how technology and power interact in society. You assume a common fallacy that I often bring up on HN — the magical decentralization fallacy — "the mistaken belie…

SOPA = Stop Online Piracy Act [0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Post reply on HN