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

100 years of whatever this will be

apenwarr.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 924 posts

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#361

Post by badrequest »

CapmCrackaWaka wrote: post #180
gtsop wrote: post #57

Excuse me for the dismissive tone, but this looks a dog chasing his tail. Does anyone REALLY believe that "things don't work"™ because the systems put in place are flawed? No sir, the systems in place work flawlessly for those who put them there, enjoy the benefits of those systems and make damn sure these systems keep benefiting them no matter what. As long as one doesn't acknowledge this very simple fact, they have…

> No sir, the systems in place work flawlessly for those who put them there Well, if you define "work" as benefiting as many people as possible, then no they don't work. That's obviously the point the author was making.

Defining it this way indicates a misunderstanding of the purpose of these systems.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#362

Post by moffkalast »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #229
notpachet wrote: post #49

All of the current histrionics that we hear from DeFi advocates regarding escaping the evil centralized Banks and Regulators and what not -- you know what they remind me of? They remind me of what I hear from junior developers when they're tasked with fixing an antiquated, broken software system. These developers typically lack the experience and the patience necessary to fix the system incrementally from within, so…

The difference here is that the existing codebase isn't just broken, it's structurally resistant to being fixed. Fixing your old legacy software takes time, but probably less time than starting over from scratch. Fixing the legacy financial system doesn't just take the time to fix that system; first you have to fix the system of politics and corruption that makes that system what it is. And fight all of the people wi…

> Fixing your old legacy software takes time, but probably less time than starting over from scratch.

Is it though? The current system is the equivalent of some old unmaintainable shit written in COBOL by a guy who quit after 30 years while making the codebase as terrible as possible to maintain job security.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#363

Post by tinco »

padobson wrote: post #309
syndacks wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had me except for the reincarnation/another life bit. Bedsides scripture, is there any evidence of this in science? I'm asking genuinely here.

I'd ask you to check your basic assumption about science as an authority. Science is really good at transmitting information about deterministic processes, but is really bad at transmitting information about non-deterministic processes or even processes that are so complex that they appear non-deterministic e.g. human behavior. I don't believe in reincarnation, but it's not hard at all for me to see how it can be use…

> I'd ask you to check your basic assumption about science as an authority.

Science is the only and ultimate final authority. It really is not a bad assumption. There literally can not be a higher authority than it by definition.

> but is really bad at transmitting information about non-deterministic processes or even processes that are so complex that they appear non-deterministic e.g. human behavior.

No it is not, science functions perfectly fine for complex processes. We can describe and draw actionable conclusions from the behaviours of fluids and gases even though they are made up of inconceivably complex interactions of billions of quantum effects.

We could easily model most of human behaviour if we really wanted to. It is just that it is unethical to do so, so we refrain from it. We make do with observing humans in the wild, and the observations we make sometimes have enough significance to make weak statements about human behaviours.

If the belief in reincarnation could be used as a moral tool to help people think long term, that should be scientifically demonstrable if it's true. It would be a hard ethical argument though, as you're basically trading a persons ability to make correct judgements of their own safety and well-being for a larger "long term" better functioning society. Not saying it's definitely wrong, but it better lead to a much better world for it to be worth it.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#364

Post by Zoo3y »

teucris wrote: post #291
delusional wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the argument is that transferrable. As a developer you don't really live within the legacy systems. At most you're a politician negotiating between the different component parts. Society is different. I don't like DeFi, but I get what they're feeling. It feels like society has left us behind. Like anything we could ever hope to try is already accounted for and defeated before the effort even begins. You…

I think there’s a nuance here in the sense that progress happens both inside the established system and outside it - grassroots campaigns, protests, local initiatives, etc. I think the key issue is that it seems like so many smart people are looking to solve things from the outside rather than involve themselves with the current system, and we need to move that pendulum back quite a bit.

and perhaps more frustrating to smart people looking to do good realize they are just one person. Huge, structural changes to society involve everyone.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#365

Post by swagasaurus-rex »

moffkalast wrote: post #347
soco wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a store charged me twice for the same item last month I was very happy to be able to reverse the transaction.

Maybe it's just me, but we all place an awful lot of trust giving vendors essentially all credit card details possible AND where we live so that they're capable of skimming a self defined sum off by themselves. It's like an inherently insane system. We're supposed to be the one wiring the cash, not the vendor themselves with our data.

I find it insulting how we are at the mercy of subscription services charging us for cancelled memberships.

How come our bank won't give us a dashboard with all of our monthly charges and cancel them at will?

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#366

Post by IIAOPSW »

CapmCrackaWaka wrote: post #330
padobson wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd ask you to check your basic assumption about science as an authority. Science is really good at transmitting information about deterministic processes, but is really bad at transmitting information about non-deterministic processes or even processes that are so complex that they appear non-deterministic e.g. human behavior. I don't believe in reincarnation, but it's not hard at all for me to see how it can be use…

> I don't believe in reincarnation, but it's not hard at all for me to see how it can be used as a moral tool that helps people think long term. At first glance things like this can sound good. However, religious ideologies like this are always double edged swords. In India, their caste system is heavily reinforced by the believe that people in a lower caste were "bad people" in a past life, and so there are no reser…

Your causation is backwards. People who feel like discriminating find a rationalization for their beliefs post hoc. Yes religious ideologies have been used to justify racism, but so to has there been "scientific racism" with with all its babbling on about skull sizes. If it weren't science or religion then it would be something else. The underlying issue is some people are bastards.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#367

Post by deathcalibur »

cs702 wrote: post #193

In practice, any distributed system that doesn't have an explicit hierarchy evolves to have an implicit hierarchy, because economies of scale and network effects favor the increasing concentration of resources and connectivity, respectively. The OP is right about that. In any distributed system, those nodes that by luck or skill become more cost-efficient and inter-connected tend to become even more cost-efficient an…

This happens with teams of humans as well. Without a formal leader, teams will naturally have one (or more) leaders emerge.

The ideal team doesn’t need leadership and consists of mostly self-sufficient members, but the de jure leader merely exists at that point to ensure some tyrant doesn’t come to power. Since this isn’t very time consuming, they are free to do other work haha.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#368

Post by abbub »

IAmWorried wrote: post #324
abbub wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean...based on what? We have more stuff, that's for sure. Our healthcare (when we can afford it) and nutrition is probably better and more consistent. Are we any happier? I'm not sure.

I honestly believe that if you remove social media from the equation, there is zero doubt that modern life makes you happier. There are so many awesome things you can do nowadays with modern tech, you have practically unlimited entertainment. But now you also have on-demand comparison, and as they say, comparison is the thief of joy. The sooner society realizes that social media is the REAL thing that is making peopl…

"...you have practically unlimited entertainment."

This is a tangent, but I feel like I enjoyed things more when I didn't have practically unlimited entertainment. Video games before the digital era with Xbox Game Pass, PSNow / PSPlus, etc were limited to a few games that you bought and really invested in. Videos before streaming where you were limited to what was sitting in Blockbuster or in your physical collection. Music was limited to what the radio was playing (which you had no control over) or what you had in your tape/CD collection. Because physical media was something of an investment, it sort of led to a sort of 'automatic curation' that's much harder with having just about every game, movie, tv show, and album at your fingertips.

Maybe it's an age thing, but now I have 'back catalogs' for all of this stuff, and there's a constant feeling of 'missing out' if you choose one thing from your unlimited supply over another thing. It's exhausting.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#369

Post by enchiridion »

notpachet wrote: post #49

All of the current histrionics that we hear from DeFi advocates regarding escaping the evil centralized Banks and Regulators and what not -- you know what they remind me of? They remind me of what I hear from junior developers when they're tasked with fixing an antiquated, broken software system. These developers typically lack the experience and the patience necessary to fix the system incrementally from within, so…

Separate from the validity of your take, it shouldn’t surprise you.

People from the field already have the tear it down and rebuild attitude. It’s only unlearned after hard experience. But that experience is never gained on society level problems because they are not making the decisions.

Re: 100 years of whatever this will be

#370

Post by ModernMech »

Veelox wrote: post #211
lisper wrote: post #103

This essay seems deep and profoundly insightful but I don't think it actually is. Its ultimate call for "better designed regulation" is the no-true-scotsman fallacy in sheep's clothing. How do you know if your regulations are "properly designed?" If they produce good outcomes. But the problem is that there is no consensus about what a good outcome is. Some people are not happy, for example, unless women are quite lit…

You seem absolutely certain you are right about certain issues. One of the big draws of America originally was that is was huge and open and you could join a community that agreed with what you mostly. Yes some people view abortion as a right, others view it as murder. The process shouldn't be to gain enough power to force everyone to follow what you want. It should be to establish rules we can all live by and then l…

IMO the actual big draw of America was that it was a nation of laws and ideals, rather than a nation of men. Those ideals are that there exists a fundamental right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for every person. The problem with the idea that we can all join a community that agreed mostly with ourselves, is that some people mostly agree that some humans can be considered property based on the color of their skin. Or that women should be subservient to men. Or that the final solution to their problems is that one religion or ethnicity should be excluded from their society. These people exist today, they were not defeated in the Civil War or WWII. See: Charlottesville.

The process isn’t about forcing everyone to follow what you want. It’s to force everyone to permit everyone else the fundamental rights protected by the Constituiton. We know for a fact that when you let people organize into autonomous groups based on their own preferences, some will tend to organize into a group that is at stark odds with the idea and ideals of America. We’ve seen it before with disastrous consequences.

Post reply on HN