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

531–540 of 823 posts

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#531

Post by AnimalMuppet »

siftrics wrote: post #515
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Intellectually dishonest" (in the great-grandparent to this comment). That's a personal attack.

No it's not. It's a technical term which means that the person is knowingly making an argument that is not valid. See the definition of validity [0] in logic. When I say they are "intellectually dishonest" I mean they are attempting to persuade others with an appeal to emotion in a subtly-crafted paragraph that looks like a rational argument, but technically is not a rational argument --- because it is invalid --- an…

"Knowingly making". You don't know. And, in fact, I wrote the comment that you were replying to, and I was absolutely not knowingly making an argument that is not valid, and I still disagree with your argument where you claim that it is invalid.

You're not psychic; you're not omniscient. You're wrong sometimes. And you're wrong here in your judging of my honesty.

And when you act like you can judge what you can't, and you judge negatively, and you say so publicly, that is at least indistinguishable from a personal attack.

So: Calling someone dishonest is almost always going to be considered a personal attack, whether you intended it that way or not. And if you do it here, it will eventually get you banned. Attack the logic or the data, not the person's intentions.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#532

Post by Dylan16807 »

siftrics wrote: post #523
Dylan16807 wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The onus is on you to remove all reasonable doubt. No it's not. Again, that's the standard for criminal punishment. Not moral judgement. And have you heard of civil law? Despite the high stakes that's usually decided based on the preponderance of evidence.

>Again, that's the standard for criminal punishment. Not moral judgement. I never said anything about moral judgement. I was never talking about moral judgement. > And have you heard of civil law? Despite the high stakes that's usually decided based on the preponderance of evidence. Unrelated. Please, do share a link where Ted Kaczynski was convicted of a crime in connection with the unplanted bombs in question, beca…

> I never said anything about moral judgement. I was never talking about moral judgement.

"Just because he bombed people previously doesn't mean he intended to do it again. You have to have stronger evidence, like writings or postage stamps, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that these two bombs were going to be planted."

"He is doing moral judgement and that one requires only reasonable probability."

"Yeah but I only have to come up with a reasonable doubt."

Aren't those lines all replies in order? Then you're using "reasonable doubt" as a couterargument to a moral judgement.

Either https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36275516 is trying to apply reasonable doubt to a moral judgement, or you're not reading the comments you're replying to.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#533

Post by always2slow »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #429
bkohlmann wrote: post #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 intere…

thanks for posting and sorry for your loss. I've heard the name TK first when reading Bill Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us". 15 years later I was burnt out and increasingly aware that Tech was not a force of good. I went on a 3 year journey trying to understand what made TK chose violence. It can't just be the struggle of a Pollak getting people to pronounce his name correctly, however hard that is. I started b…

How did you do all that research into TK and not realize his mind was broken by MKUltra? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Psychological_st...

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#534

Post by inpdx »

resolutebat wrote: post #525
bbor wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>He justifies the trade-offs that come with losing industrial society as being worth the cost. That is fucking deranged. Describing it as deranged is an understatement, and it blows my mind that you’re defending it _on an internet forum_. Only someone who’s never seen someone die of violence or disease could ever say some shit like that. Today is reminding me that I need to take hacker news commenters much less serio…

His argument is basically that industrial society increases net suffering from violence and disease, because large populations are unsustainable and rely on the exploitation of the third world's poor. So instead of having one person die from a curable infection because nobody has antibiotics, you have five dying of infections because the population has exploded and antibiotics exist but they can't afford them.

Someone who claims to care about humans while murdering them really has zero credibility.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#535

Post by NovaDudely »

sph wrote: post #67
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

Yes. Someone linked the manifesto in an HN thread ages ago, and I found more level-headed and thought-provoking than I would have imagined from someone able to commit such evil acts. I do not agree with everything he wrote in the manifesto, and certainly not with his violent methods, but it's stuck with me in this era of naive techno-optimism which I find myself more disillusioned with by the day. If the name on the…

> If the name on the front page was not of a murderer, I truly believe it would be recommended reading in schools and philosophy clubs.

This is the saddest part, he didn't have to do it the way he did.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#536

Post by Dylan16807 »

williamcotton wrote: post #518
Dylan16807 wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The logic is really simple: someone can come up with almost any reason to justify murder if they believe themselves solely capable of such judgment. I think if you do a survey you'll find lots of people agreeing that major oil executives and PR should be judged harshly. Not murder, but definitely being judged as bad in a way that everyday people pass. I don't think your argument works at all. Harshly judging some p…

There’s a deep level of misunderstanding and argumentativeness that makes me think you’re trolling me… so we’re done here!

I'm not trolling you. I think you're making very broad claims about psychology that aren't supported by evidence, and I'm doing my best to understand and engage.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#537

Post by HKH2 »

catiopatio wrote: post #407
Kye wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wonder how many people who could have done better were blocked by the actions of all these artists people want to make excuses for. How many great works were we denied because someone insisted on making space for someone who repelled (or worse) better people?

The zero-sum command-economy view of free speech: we have to exercise prior restraint on what people can say to ensure that there’s room for the people we approve of to speak.

More charitably, attention is zero-sum and we personally have to prioritize if we want to maximize quality.

What you said assumes that people will give up on that and jump to coercion. Maybe your cynicism is warranted.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#538

Post by [deleted] »

MisterTea wrote: post #512
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thanks for posting and sorry for your loss. I've heard the name TK first when reading Bill Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us". 15 years later I was burnt out and increasingly aware that Tech was not a force of good. I went on a 3 year journey trying to understand what made TK chose violence. It can't just be the struggle of a Pollak getting people to pronounce his name correctly, however hard that is. I started b…

> Ellul will push you off the cliff of society and do something that today is unthinkable: to question technology and technological progress itself. I don't think this is as radical of an idea as you think as I think about this quite often. Basically the grim realizations of the harm I bring upon the earth in pursuit of my career, hobbies, and other lifestyle choices. It honestly bothers me regularly enough to make m…

[deleted]

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#539

Post by dennis_jeeves1 »

fairity wrote: post #524
dennis_jeeves1 wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Thankfully there are many alternatives. What exactly are they? (the last I checked is that it's virtually impossible to live somewhere (even remote) off the land, without paying a ton in taxes, if you did succeed in some manner without attracting attention in a remote place it would soon get the attention of authorities in due course).

IMO, the alternatives are all based on a reframing of mindset versus a change in external environment. My understanding is that most of Kacynski’s disillusionment was born out of: - a recognition of how artificial most people’s values and goals are - an inability to find authentic & fulfilling values and goals - an innate urge to be useful and important Put another way, Kacynski didn’t want to be like the brainwashed…

All I wanted to do was live life off the land without interference, guess from what you are said it's too much to ask for...

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#540

Post by siftrics »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #532
siftrics wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Again, that's the standard for criminal punishment. Not moral judgement. I never said anything about moral judgement. I was never talking about moral judgement. > And have you heard of civil law? Despite the high stakes that's usually decided based on the preponderance of evidence. Unrelated. Please, do share a link where Ted Kaczynski was convicted of a crime in connection with the unplanted bombs in question, beca…

> I never said anything about moral judgement. I was never talking about moral judgement. "Just because he bombed people previously doesn't mean he intended to do it again. You have to have stronger evidence, like writings or postage stamps, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that these two bombs were going to be planted." "He is doing moral judgement and that one requires only reasonable probability." "Yeah but I only…

Okay, this is a miscommunication.

I should have made it more clear that "Yeah but I only have to come up with..." meant "With respect to what I claimed..."

Sorry, I really am trying to be as charitable as possible with my interpretations of these comments.

I just hate to see people conflate emotion with logical soundness and validity. Appeals to emotion are human and valid and expose interesting points, but I can't stand to see them used to tear down the intellectual value (whether or not something is logically true) of ideas.

Post reply on HN