Live data from Hacker News

Ted Kaczynski has died

nytimes.com

351–360 of 823 posts

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Technology bad." It's really that. He falls for the same trap many modern critics of progress do: the nostalgia for a world that never existed, when men lived meaningful lives in peaceful harmony with nature... juxtaposed with all the purported moral, societal, and environmental decay of today. Many people find it alluring today, but the themes are evergreen. They crop up in ancient Greece, in the Middle Ages, and t…

> He falls for the same trap many modern critics of progress do: the nostalgia for a world that never existed There's the opposite problem most have: the inability to understand that there are people who have actually experienced the past (within their lives) and might prefer it for reasons other than the cliche "they were young then, that's why they like it" compared to the present. And that, depending on your incli…

I’ve mentioned before and there was a thread yesterday about a modern Usenet which I think falls into this line of thinking. In the early 90s there was an egalitarian messaging system that wasn’t actively and continuously abused. I would love to be able to be in a world like that, however, that world can’t exist again (at least not in the way it did).

As the saying goes, the only constant is change.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#352
One of my good friend’s dad was brutally murdered by Kaczynski when she was a young teenager.

A small bomb in a package that used razor blazes, nails, and other bits of metal to nearly tear his head off while his young family was in the house with him.

And it turns out the victim was the “wrong” man, as he didn’t even work on the project Kaczynski wanted to bring “retribution” for.

Kaczynski May have said some interesting things, but he physically tore apart the lives of many, leaving a wake of destruction during his crusade.

Actions speak louder than words. Even eloquent ones.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#353

Kaczynski's entire opposition to technology seems to focus purely on amplifying the negative aspects of technological advancement. But after reading David Deutsch, I cannot but think all and any technological advancement is desirable and there's little merit to technological doomerism.

"Any and all"? It's not a particularly surprising attitude to find here, but I think it's a hard one to justify. Does ubiquitous surveillance technology not bother you at all, no matter how it's likely to be used? Are new methods of killing people always good? How about mind control? Not that we have it, but "any and all" would cover it. Is "doomerism" the only alternative you can think of to infinite optimism? That's a textbook example of the excluded middle.

I hope you just phrased that poorly, because if that attitude were widely and sincerely held it would be scary indeed. I say that, BTW, as someone who's generally optimistic about the possibilities inherent in new technology, and has even created a bit here and there. The uses and effects of technology must always be considered, not just naively assumed to be beneficial. Un-nuanced optimism is just as simplistic and "meritless" as its mirror image.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#354

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…

As far as I know from studying history, it's impossible to win without violence

The threat of violence can be both effective and nonviolent. Every battle is won before it is ever fought- and by corollary, it is possible to win without ever having fought.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't suppose anyone has a short summary?

"Technology bad." It's really that. He falls for the same trap many modern critics of progress do: the nostalgia for a world that never existed, when men lived meaningful lives in peaceful harmony with nature... juxtaposed with all the purported moral, societal, and environmental decay of today. Many people find it alluring today, but the themes are evergreen. They crop up in ancient Greece, in the Middle Ages, and t…

Something that blew my mind long ago was learning the scottish highlands used to be a massive forest. Ancient humans clear cut the entire landscape and it still hasn't recovered. That sort of broke the illusion of there being some forgotten past of arcadian perfection, where we lived in one and balance with nature. Humans have always been humans. Exploitative, expansionist, perfectly willing to destroy our long term prospects for short term gain. At least in modern western societies we have the power to recognize this part of ourselves, and put aside areas like national parks free from our grasping fingers.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#356
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Besides, to think that there even is such a thing called technology (as distinguished from what) is incredibly naive The same could be said about Capitalism.

This is an ideological position, termed Capitalist Realism [1]. Given the failing of social reproduction, environmental protection, long term planning against existential and systemic risk, the mental health crisis and the collapse of civil and political life, under entrenched and victorious capitalism - an increasingly absurd one. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism

>collapse of civil and political life

civil and political life is terrible and still better than it has ever been

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#358

Anyone who disagrees with Kaczynski's ideas because they came from a convicted terrorist should read the works of Jacques Ellul instead, of which Kaczynski's was largely a popular reduction. The Technological Society is the clearest influence on Kaczynski's manifesto, but Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes is possibly more pertinent in this day and age. Ellul was a professor, a pacifist, and a Christian ana…

[deleted]

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#359
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a very progressive person, I quite enjoyed his critique of the modern Leftist ideals and why they would create the factionalism we see today, and he's arguing not as a conservative, but as a third position that is not represented by any mainstream camp. Realistically his opinions are held by a substantial amount of people that most would label conservative, although it's not mainstream conservatism for sure. And…

As a non American, the dichotomy that is all the rage nowadays is two camps whose position is literally just "we hate everything the other side loves". The point of Kaczynski is that both camps are mostly composed of middle-class Western academics living a sheltered life that are deciding who is socially accepted and who need to be cancelled. Our culture wars are not minorities shouting for a better life, our culture…

Kaczynski was a middle-class Western academic who tried to literally cancel the lives of those he deemed unacceptable, which included people from both camps.

Thank god there's a divide, otherwise I would be obliged to agree with you.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#360
post #292
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He participated in about 200 hours of experiments from the age of 16 to 19 which basically consisted of "roasting" and bullying him. The experimenters intentionally sought out the most insecure "maladjusted" students at Harvard (Kaczynski was accepted at 16) and lied about what the experiment was going to do. The entire thing was horrible and profoundly unethical. His brother has stated it really changed Kaczynski. S…

>Whatever the case may be, of the group of students that were subjected to these abusive experiments only one became a terrorist Source? What is the incidence of terrorism in that group and in the general population?

Well, whatever the size of the group is (let's call it X) it's at least 1 out of X. Which is almost certainly more than the general population.
Post reply on HN