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

561–570 of 823 posts

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#561

Post by bbor »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #252
op00to wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude. There is a difference between a bomb that has significant ability to kill and destroy and sample code.

Is there? Whoops. I’ve been doing it wrong for about 20 years now. (My sense of humor has gotten me in hot water more than once, so I may as well go all-in. Probably a matter of time till it nips me though.) In seriousness, the goal here is to have curious conversation, and follow that curiosity wherever it leads. I agree it sounds asinine, but think of the sheer number of details he had to get right merely to surviv…

It was a live bomb. You don’t just keep live bombs sitting around your house unless you plan on using them…

Also wait what even is this comment. Why are you just praising the Unabomber unprompted? That’s not what the person you’re replying to was even talking about…

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#562

Post by dang »

siftrics wrote: post #546
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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, a…

I'm sorry, I'm still not trying to personally attack anyone. I didn't even realize my comment would be interpreted as offensive rather than a statement of fact. This is the definition of intellectual dishonesty according to Wikipedia: "Intentionally committed fallacies in debates and reasoning are called intellectual dishonesty." I read your argument as "this man emotionally affected me via a personal connection I ha…

I've replied to you more fully at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36277721, but want to mention something here too. The problem with what you're saying here is that word "intentionally". You can't know someone else's intent from internet comments. Overwhelmingly, when person A says something negative about B's intent, B will react with hurt feelings, anger, or outrage, because they don't think that was their intent at all. (This is exactly what happened in this case, as you can see from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36277408.)

It will get you a very long way indeed if you simply remind yourself that you can't know someone else's intent and edit your comments until they no longer include any assumptions about intent. If, in addition to that, you make your comments without pejoratives (and especially without pejoratives that have anything to do with other commenters), you should be in good shape.

I believe that you're sincerely asking for clarity here, so I hope this helps!

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#563

Post by emodendroket »

californiadreem wrote: post #32

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…

> Ellul was a professor, a pacifist, and a Christian anarchist. Attacks the ideas, not the man.

Who would care about Kaczynski's ravings without the murders?

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#564

Post by emodendroket »

lm28469 wrote: post #418
happytoexplain wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't disagree with him because he was a convicted terrorist, they disagree with him because of the specific things he did to be convicted of terrorism. That's reasonable (correct, even). People might know or not know each opinion he expressed, and might reasonably agree or disagree with each one, but that's not the same thing.

> People might know or not know each opinion he expressed, and might reasonably agree or disagree with each one Isn't that the definition of agreeing (or not) with someone ? > but that's not the same thing. How so ?

He forced his way into the conversation through terrorism. It seems reasonable enough to reject his ideas out of hand rather than give them respectful hearing.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#566

Post by jxramos »

notjulianjaynes wrote: post #551
spurgu wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The positive comments are mostly in response to his view/ideas/philosophy, as in Industrial Society and Its Future and his subsequent books - I don't think there's a single person here condoning the bombings. If you were to read his works you might find that he wasn't so deranged after all, quite the opposite. Edit: In terms of the philosophy/view I mean. The bombings were made out of bitterness and anger and are ine…

Had Kaczynski not conducted his campaign of bombings he would have had no leverage to get the Washington Post to publish his manifesto. I re-skimmed the manifesto earlier today. It's not uninteresting, but I don't think it's the sort of thing which can be considered or appreciated outside the context of his violent acts. For one, no one would have read it if Kacynzski had been a nonviolent academic. As for bitterness…

very interesting, essentially riding the coattails of the notoriety in derangement, what a concept.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#567

Post by lumb63 »

spencerchubb wrote: post #557

I don't find Ted Kaczynski's manifesto to be insightful. It points out that technology has flaws, which is frankly quite obvious and is a fact that everyone already agrees with. Furthermore, his proposed solution is crap. He proposes that we just go back to wilderness, which is bad for many obvious reasons. Technology and division of labor has allowed us to spend our days improving humanity rather than finding food j…

I had a different take on his writings than yours. Rather than thinking his solution was bad, he encouraged me to question why we “spend our days improving humanity”.

What does “improving humanity” even mean? What’s the metric we are optimizing for? Are we, humanity, any happier than we were when we were hunter-gatherer tribes? I don’t think so - we’ve just found new metrics to focus on and to be disappointed in ourselves in.

His writing encouraged me to consider that we are evolutionarily ill-suited for our current situation. We have resources far in excess of our needs, and yet we struggle. We find new issues to focus on, new problems, new fights, new causes. Our desire to “improve humanity” will never end, because it cannot end. When it does, we will find something new to take its place.

Maybe our purpose in life is to find food to survive. It is the task our ancestors evolved to do for millions and millions of years. It is our inheritance, in that way.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#568

Post by pdabbadabba »

ginko wrote: post #360
lvass wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

By that logic, we might as well just blame it on his beard.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#569

Post by pyuser583 »

spencerchubb wrote: post #557

I don't find Ted Kaczynski's manifesto to be insightful. It points out that technology has flaws, which is frankly quite obvious and is a fact that everyone already agrees with. Furthermore, his proposed solution is crap. He proposes that we just go back to wilderness, which is bad for many obvious reasons. Technology and division of labor has allowed us to spend our days improving humanity rather than finding food j…

It’s not insightful. But it’s obvious he is highly educated, and familiar with academic culture.

I don’t understand how the FBI profiled him as poorly educated.

Re: Ted Kaczynski has died

#570

Post by jxramos »

quetzthecoatl wrote: post #264
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

who knows who Kaczynski would have ended up as a person if not for the horrible, abusive mind control experiments that he had to endure through in his early adulthood.

why did he have to endure them anyways? Was he not a volunteer, what gives?
Post reply on HN