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

Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

thehub.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 109 posts

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#71

Post by ChatGTP »

anovikov wrote: post #24
boxed wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of purpose is the core thing I think. If you have that, then isolation solves itself, and obesity might very well solve itself too. Lack of purpose is also the consequence of not being able to even think of a brighter future. Not seeing what humanity COULD be and working towards it.

Lack of purpose is inevitable and unfixable. In the world where success is infinitely scalable as we are living in the information age, most people are doomed to uselessness no matter what. Trick is how to help them get over it. Obesity is a medical problem and will be solved by rather trivial medical means very soon, at least on that front, future is bright.

So we’ll just be taking pills for everything ?

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#72

Post by RandomLensman »

cheeseomlit wrote: post #70
RandomLensman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you define as hedonism and its philosophical roots/components?

Epicureanism perhaps? The hedonist mindset is certainly not novel to the 20th century as that poster seems to imply- Though I largely agree with their characterization of it, as its popularity seems to accompany periods of societal decline- Though whether it is a cause or a symptom is hard to say

I would find it hard to draw a line from classical Epicureanism towards social decline or simply map some hedonistic periods of the 20th century onto it.

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#73

Post by ChatGTP »

lnsru wrote: post #56
qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #39

The problem is not with progress. The problem is with denial of a dilema. Human baseline nature is unable to handle much more progress. Meaning, we are already very close to the killer drone dilema, and as even small crisis like the Covid virus have shown, once we come under pressure we fall apart. We can pretend all we want in good times, that we are strong and cohesive and we have good captains steering the ship. B…

I would say, our modern controlled democracy can’t solve any problem. Why “controlled”? Because only professional conmen backed by some shady organizations can enter the voting list with real election change. I know tons really smart and good hearted people. I can guarantee, their work would be very beneficial for whole society. And yet no one of them gets elected somewhere. Democracy being complete scam is also bein…

Democracy being complete scam is also being promoted as a single true government form. It’s actually worse than communism.

I’m actually seeing this a lot lately. Maybe a bit of American self-doubt starting to show ?

I’ve really noticed the last few weeks especially a bit of a “Maybe China has it right” attitude.

My theory is maybe it’s the fear of job losses making people think twice about the free market capitalist society actually being a wise thing to be part of once you’re no longer as required as in the past ? Just general disillusionment ?

I actually agree with you btw , what we have does not work anymore, it’s not solving the problems of today.

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#74

Post by ChatGTP »

fjfaase wrote: post #41

The main problem with humanity is the lack of wisdom, not the lack of progress. Discovering something is nice, but if you are not able to handle it, it is of no use. When antibiotics were discovered, it made a great improvement on health of people. But instead of using it in a wise way, it was grossly overused, resulting in widespread resistance, slowly undoing all it positive effects. And that is how it basically ha…

Wisdom is sure lacking, this is what scares me about generative AI, it doesn’t grant wisdom, it allows us to do stupid shit at 10x.

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#76

Post by wnkrshm »

Towaway69 wrote: post #61
wnkrshm wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is: The larger the wallet, the larger the vote. Also, consumers get manipulated to buy into black boxes all the time. Nobody wants to know how their sausage is made but everyone would buy one. A company that is perfectly transparent about their supply chain would fail.

Well yes and no, in not purchasing something I am also making a statement. Manipulation has to do with education and sources of information. But as long as the notion that happiness can only be found in purchasing products, then not much will change. Perhaps poverty can be a good thing.

The sources of information are the limit though - to make a better world using this sort of 'consumption vote'[0], businesses and their relationships need to be way more transparent, with possibly a regulated transparency.

I wonder whether there could be FOSS business intelligence to a degree that the most likely business relationships of entities will be estimated and published, automatically. And then companies that actually supply data about their supply chains etc. will have a marketing advantage.

[0] you cannot organize this vote, since there are anti-boycott laws

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#77

Post by cheeseomlit »

RandomLensman wrote: post #72
cheeseomlit wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Epicureanism perhaps? The hedonist mindset is certainly not novel to the 20th century as that poster seems to imply- Though I largely agree with their characterization of it, as its popularity seems to accompany periods of societal decline- Though whether it is a cause or a symptom is hard to say

I would find it hard to draw a line from classical Epicureanism towards social decline or simply map some hedonistic periods of the 20th century onto it.

The line would be overly broad and blurry, to be sure. But I think Voltaire's maxim has some sense to it- "History is only the pattern of silken slippers descending the stairs to the thunder of hobnailed boots climbing upward from below." The rise and fall of great societies frequently parallel this general difference in temperament- The prosperous fruits of stoic labor create a lavish environment for their successors, in which they languish in indolence and allow the foundations built by their ancestors to crumble for want of diligence and prudence.

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#78

Post by SyzygistSix »

mathieuh wrote: post #32
anovikov wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of purpose is inevitable and unfixable. In the world where success is infinitely scalable as we are living in the information age, most people are doomed to uselessness no matter what. Trick is how to help them get over it. Obesity is a medical problem and will be solved by rather trivial medical means very soon, at least on that front, future is bright.

Not everyone has to have some grand purpose. I work to earn enough money to do what I like, I'm not planning or hoping to make a heap of money. I would be perfectly happy living a comfortable yet completely unnoticed life. In fact I think a lot of people my age (late 20s) are starting to feel like this as a reaction to the idea that anyone who isn't driving a nice car or going abroad several times a year is a failure…

>In fact I think a lot of people my age (late 20s) are starting to feel like this as a reaction to the idea that anyone who isn't driving a nice car or going abroad several times a year is a failure.

Most of the people around me and I always saw that lifestyle as an strong indication of and reaction to no sense of purpose.

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#79

Post by rayiner »

RandomLensman wrote: post #68
rayiner wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tried hedonism as a guiding principle over and over in the 20th century. Whereas Protestant work ethic gave us america, hedonism gave us the aids epidemic, over 100,000 drug overdoses annually, a generation of men that have opted out of adulthood, and the need to import people from non-hedonist countries just to keep the population stable. Enjoy your antibiotic resistant STDs.

What do you define as hedonism and its philosophical roots/components?

I think if you’re talking about social change that happens at scale, people are not necessarily following a specific coherent philosophy. But hedonistic values were widely adopted in various contexts in the mid-20th century. For example the sexual revolution and free love movement of the 1960s: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna19053382. These attitudes are also prevalent in terms of messages given to young people regarding vocation (“follow your bliss,” etc.)

Re: Make the future bright again: On building a new philosophy of progress

#80

Post by Towaway69 »

wnkrshm wrote: post #76
Towaway69 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes and no, in not purchasing something I am also making a statement. Manipulation has to do with education and sources of information. But as long as the notion that happiness can only be found in purchasing products, then not much will change. Perhaps poverty can be a good thing.

The sources of information are the limit though - to make a better world using this sort of 'consumption vote'[0], businesses and their relationships need to be way more transparent, with possibly a regulated transparency. I wonder whether there could be FOSS business intelligence to a degree that the most likely business relationships of entities will be estimated and published, automatically. And then companies tha…

Anti-boycott laws, but surely only between nation states? Being forced to purchase something would seem little dictatorial.

Boycott could also include purchasing an EV - thereby the consumer is boycotting the oil industry. Meaning there does not necessarily need to be transparency of the supply chain to make a consumption vote.

Post reply on HN