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

Ted Kaczynski has died

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 823 posts

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#191

Post by brvsft »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #61
drones wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are way more Ted K's running around today - it's just that you don't need to kill people to get heard anymore. Nowadays the spectacle of ruining your own life is enough to get noticed. Anyone with an internet connection today has access to world stage provided they are interesting enough. Back then you'd need to catch the eye of a producer for a mainstream news broadcast to get any coverage. Now you can just fi…

You seem to suggest that Kaczynski murdered as a kind of marketing strategy for his ideas. I highly doubt that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber_Manifesto

> Between 1978 and 1995, Ted Kaczynski engaged in a mail bomb campaign[4] against people involved with modern technology.[5] His initial targets were universities and airlines, which the FBI shortened as UNABOM. In June 1995, Kaczynski offered to end his campaign if one of several publications (the Washington Post, New York Times, or Penthouse) would publish his critique of technology, titled Industrial Society and Its Future, which became widely known as the "Unabomber Manifesto".[6]

In a sense, he used the murders as a marketing strategy, but honestly it was more of a threat to force his manifesto to be published.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#192

Post by siftrics »

arp242 wrote: post #178
siftrics wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's not really about intellectual honesty or validity, but about morality. The only reason any of us are discussing Kaczynski now is because he sent those bombs; he would almost certainly be an unknown if he had not. This gives us an moral quandary, because do we really want to make murderers famous, even when they have something interesting to say? Won't this incentivise future acts of murder and terrorism? And for…

> Won't this incentivise future acts of murder and terrorism?

Yes, that's what he was trying to do.

Ted claims we must stop technology, even with violent means, because technology causes greater suffering than the violent means to stop it.

You claim "but that's violent!"

That's not an argument. If you did try to make an argument (against Ted's ideas), I would agree with you. I would try to make that argument myself.

We can have an intellectual dialogue without devolving to "this made me feel bad therefore you're wrong!"

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#194

Post by Supermancho »

ripourhero wrote: post #107
sebmellen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a person who exhibited such deranged behavior, his writing and arguments are remarkably clear and cool-headed.

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard of operation condor? project mkultra? As far as I know from studying history, it's impossible to win (= survive as a culture against encroachment from different cultures) without violence. Today's mantra of pacifism and non-violence is just propaganda from current governments (all of which were originally installed through bloodshed, and kept in power through never-ending bloodsh…

Violence one of the most effective means of motivation, known to man; second only to shame.

Nonviolent change (toward peace)is somewhere down the imaginary page, but it can be effective. It is both less timely and long lasting.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#195

Post by happytoexplain »

hnuser847 wrote: post #52

It’s fun to drop verbatim quotes from his manifesto into random internet discussions without attribution. A lot of people agree with his ideas without realizing it.

This isn't as indicative of ignorance or hypocrisy as it implies (and it comes off as a petty "gotcha" with an attitude of superiority). He said and did a lot of things. It's normal to variously agree and disagree with each thing in a vacuum. This is true of most political/societal figures, no matter how horrific they are, taken as a whole.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#197

Post by readthenotes1 »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #189
ahoy wrote: post #154

Kaczynski was essentially a blackpilled fascist. He spends the huge bulk of his manifesto ranting against leftism. I think its fine to attack the ideas as well.

None of his ideas have anything to do with fascism. Rallying against leftism does not make one a fascist. As far as I remember, in Industrial Society and its Future, Kaczynski did not propose authoritarianism or nationalism in any way or form.

"Rallying against leftism does not make one a fascist."

You must have missed the memo that defines "fascism to be anything someone more conservative than AOC believes in.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#198

Post by timeon »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #97
JKCalhoun wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to suggest that Kaczynski murdered as a kind of marketing strategy for his ideas. I highly doubt that.

From the manifesto itself: "In order to attract attention to our ideas, we've had to kill people." Quoting from memory - may not be word for word. So, if you can believe him, then yes, he murdered as a marketing strategy.

That is also marketing. He was hiding his personal grievances behind these ideas.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#200

Post by wellthisisgreat »

crhulls wrote: post #31

His manifesto is worth reading. Although he was obviously a twisted man many of his predictions for the future were eerily prescient. http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf

Wow Pocket browser extension refuses to save this link.

Never seen that happen

Post reply on HN