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

No More “Insight Porn”

jakobgreenfeld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 323 posts

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#301

Post by suction »

wnolens wrote: post #173
suction wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Best comedy on TV. Basically anything Fielder has touched so far, was gold. Or maybe it's because his brand of comedy really works for me, personally.

The latter. I can barely watch him. I'll admit he's incredibly original and I really appreciate a skit or two. But he borders on sociopathic, and his latest movie is a great encapsulation of that.

Movie? I guess you meant show?

A friend of mine thinks like you, he feels extremely uncomfortable watching Fielder and his brand of comedy, and any sort of "cringe" comedy about sociopathic individuals, e.g. Curb Your Enthusiasm.

I really can't empathize, because after all he's playing a character which should be very obvious.

I think for my friend, the stuff depicted in this sort of comedy hits a bit too close to home, i.e. this sort of comedy doesn't work for people who are socially awkward because it reminds them of IRL too much, and conjures up bad memories, while normal people just laugh at the exaggeration of the awkwardness.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#302

Post by suction »

bowsamic wrote: post #36
suction wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does everything nowadays? I think the analogy to porn at least here is fitting. The idea porn as a word to mean "of no substance, for easy consummation, from morally questionable sources, to make a quick buck off desperate people" quite accurately describes all these "insight gurus", which to me are grifters.

That's not what it means. Look at subreddits like /r/historyporn or /r/earthporn. These do not mean porn in any kind of derogatory sense. It literally means nothing more specific than "lots of content that people like". It really does not carry a derogatory connotation, or at least it is most widely used in positive ways

You're right, I wasn't aware of that usage. Another reason to keep avoiding Reddit like the plague.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#303

Post by suction »

collaborative wrote: post #214
suction wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason these bad actors exist is because there are a lot of marks for their con. We wonder why there are so many alleged Nigerian princes with money logistics problems on the internet - this is the same thing, just in less obvious fashion. A fool and his money are soon parted. The real question a society should ask itself is to what extent it should protect its fools from their own gullibleness and inevitabl…

Schools should harden students against idiot-traps. Perhaps a class of "History of scams" would be appropriate

That would be a very practical approach, and also could be fun for children as it's not a dry topic.

On a more general level, I think we (as in any society that's not too far gone like Russia) need to educate our young about propaganda and how to not fall for it.

Social media has been a game changer in terms of the spread of propaganda, if nothing is done about that then I fear we'll see the end of humankind in our lifetime.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#304

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

chowells wrote: post #211
bombcar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Get lucky" is always the key - however, you can increase your "luck surface" by doing certain things (for example, you couldn't have gotten lucky if you hadn't started the company, nor if you hadn't bothered to talk to people).

No one ever talks about the opportunity cost of building up a "luck surface". What is the expected value of doing so? What do you have to sacrifice to do so? Is there any evidence the EV is positive, or is this just another selection bias?

You just might cost yourself an unfulfilling life you live out of duty.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#305

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

Miserlou57 wrote: post #275
deltree7 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expected value is really a dumb way to evaluate lottery tickets. I can't believe even supposedly good mathematicians use it. The next dumb way to evaluate lottery tickets is to compare it with other long odds (lightning strikes, marrying your favorite actor). If you want to play along, the probability of you winning the lottery is 10000000000000x more favorable than the probability of you existing in this universe. B…

I had an argument with my boss about this. He is a business owner and pretty successful one, and he calls the lottery a poverty tax, or a stupidity tax. If it were a game you play in Vegas, then he’d be right. It’s my opinion that just buying one ticket, for say $2, essentially is a trivial and inconsequential amount of money that exposes you to incredible upside. Imagine if the ticket only cost a penny. At that poin…

What about the people who do hundreds in instant lottery, or dozens to hundreds of dollars every week for the standard games (and no, they aren't ALL pooled for a frigging office).

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#306

Post by vidarh »

soulofmischief wrote: post #181
vidarh wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first company got its investment because one of my co-founders talked about it to a random stranger at a bar, who turned out to have money burning in his pocket. I second your advice to get lucky. Most of my 27 year career has followed as a domino from that. Once we'd paid back his investment and exited (for a pittance; the ISP marked we'd entered had become impossible for a small player), his lawyer happened to g…

The initial part has a large element of luck, but to be fair it was also because your co-founder was busy networking in public spaces. And most of the events after that sound like the fruits of being skilled, agreeable and available. Luck played a part, but don't sell yourself short. :)

While skill etc. certainly also played a part - I'm not in any way suggesting that luck is sufficient -, my point was that most of these were intertwined in a way that meant they were dependent on that first domino. I probably would have done fine without it, but it'd have looked very different.

Even though my skills certainly also played a role, I could also have been equally skilled and taken another job and missed out on meeting the right people and ended up with far less satisfying outcomes. And many do. Or I could have been born somewhere where I wouldn't have had the same opportunities.

Luck and skill amplify each other, and a problem is that people often want to think it was all down to their skills. A lot of subsequent failures happen when people fail to learn the right lessons because they don't understand which parts of their earlier successes were down to luck and so try to copy the same approach in different conditions.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#307

Post by bowsamic »

acuozzo wrote: post #160
bowsamic wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what it means. Look at subreddits like /r/historyporn or /r/earthporn. These do not mean porn in any kind of derogatory sense. It literally means nothing more specific than "lots of content that people like". It really does not carry a derogatory connotation, or at least it is most widely used in positive ways

> It literally means nothing more specific than "lots of content that people like". I think it's a bit more than that, something like: "lots of content that people like and will waste a ton of time consuming for little hits of dopamine".

There is nothing on the subreddit that indicates that anyone considers it a waste of time to consume content there

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#308

Post by bumby »

danaris wrote: post #300
bumby wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t this what limited liability corporations help ensure? People need a way to limit downsides, not have zero downside. It’s like giving a student a service chance at a test to help ensure they learn the material. But giving them unlimited attempts with no risk doesn’t create the same environment.

LLCs let you avoid having personal liability for accidents, corporate malfeasance, etc. They don't let you avoid having to invest your own money into the company to try to make it go, because no one else cares enough about your idea to do so, then lose it all if it fails. Having something like universal basic income absolutely does not reduce the risk to zero. What it does is it reduces the penalty for failure —failu…

LLCs do provide limitations towards losing your life savings or home. They create a buffer between personal and corporate assets. I think a key difference is the benefits are targeted towards those who are trying to create value, whereas UBI is much less targeted. At least from an economic sense, LLCs seem like a much more efficient mechanism.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#309

Post by tertius »

rsanek wrote: post #195
thenerdhead wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a new idea. Just a new messenger for the modern era. Marcus Aurelius was talking about this thousands of years ago. > At dawn, when you have trouble getting out of bed, tell yourself: “I have to go to work — as a human being. What do I have to complain of, if I’m going to do what I was born for — the things I was brought into the world to do? Or is this what I was created for? To huddle under the blankets…

Rough self-talk from Marcus Aurelius in this passage. Not a big fan of this kind of approach personally. I've found that if I need to do this kind of self-motivation, I should be thinking much higher-level for the causes -- why do I not want to get out of bed? Perhaps I'm not working on the right thing, and need to change careers? Or perhaps I'm not dealing with something emotionally that is preventing me from doing…

The answer is: Do both.

Often times not having the discipline to get up when you need to is the problem. And the solution is to tough it out.

So while you look for the cause, also work against the symptom.

For instance, quitting alcohol.

You need to quit, as well as try to look for the reason you're escaping into it. Do both.

Re: No More “Insight Porn”

#310

Post by tertius »

kirse wrote: post #205
recyclelater wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jocko willinck (and many others I am sure) likes to state that you can’t rely on motivation because it comes and goes. Rely on discipline, build habits using discipline if you want to get anything done. A trite but in my opinion helpful statement is discipline equals freedom.

discipline equals freedom The problem is it's not even correct. Discipline does not equal freedom. Have you ever seen a well-meaning man with all his might do the same incorrect thing over and over? Of course you have, because we're all that person in some area of life.

What's the best argument against your straw man here?
Post reply on HN