311–320 of 352 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Well, did you see with your own eyes the earth is round rather than flat? No, so you can't state either? That makes most reasonable statements impossible to make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> before we had technology There wasn't a time "before we had technology". Best to avoid that line of thinking if you want to escape the determinist (Veblem) trap and end up like Kaczynski. Postman is an author we enjoy but seldom acknowledge the wider genre into which he fits. It's called "tech critique". You can study it through the ages, comparing the outlooks and influences of Einstein, Ellul, Freud, Fromm, Heide…
>There wasn't a time "before we had technology" Well, this was nothing if not besides the point. Anyone on this site should recognize that when people like the person you responded to use the word "technology", especially in this context, it is typically a colloquialism for information technology, as in television, computers, phones and the like. Even in colloquial English amongst the public, "technology" hasn't refe…
Content from Amusing Ourselves to Death presented as a visual comic to facilitate/"enhance" its communication is deeply ironic. Can't wait for the TikTok video.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But no one wins as long as Global Human Attention isn't given purpose. We await someone or some group to articulate that vision. One of the best things I've done for myself is to stop reading the news. You will not believe how this ignorance has led me to a calmer life, to the gasp and concern of my peers, wondering how am I able to cope, to exist, without knowing what happens "in the world?" As you say, anyone has…
It's my opinion that "thinking locally and acting locally" is a strategy better reserved for old age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, did you see with your own eyes the earth is round rather than flat? No, so you can't state either? That makes most reasonable statements impossible to make.
Are you able to say that 'you assume that the earth is a sphere but don't know that to be the case'? Do you actually say 'I know the earth is a sphere' even though you don't "know"? Do you know the difference between belief and knowing?
I believe the earth is sphere shaped. I'm pretty sure it is, but I haven't seen it with my own eyes. I have seen parts of the curvature of the earth, but can't be 100 percent sure this was not due to lens effects of the atmosphere. Nonetheless I am quite strong in my belief because all i read and heard about the topic seems to make sense. I never met Newton, Keppler but I believe what was written by/about them is correct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but I want to live somewhere my kids have the freedom to bike and walk around town safely. Anyway, I just took a job helping get more houses off gas and on heat pumps, which is aligned with my goal to be part of addressing climate change, but it is hard to get a house near work (in Amsterdam in this case) when not optimising for pay.
> No, but I want to live somewhere my kids have the freedom to bike and walk around town safely. Hmmmz, kids can do that practically anywhere in NL (and have good schools). Except maybe in parts of the big cities. Countryside is both cheaper, safer, and the air is healthier. But don't go too rural. Because then wolves will get your kids for breakfast.
I was mostly thinking of back when I was in California to be honest. Though recently when I had to decide between a four or five day work week the biggest factor was “will I be able to outbid other people who want the same house”
As far as schools, I’ve been underwhelmed. They have kids on tablets a lot, shove a tv in front of them for lunch, and have rapidly declining PISA scores.
Original comic source: https://www.recombinantrecords.net/docs/2009-05-Amusing-Ours... (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20100111052839/http://www.recomb... ) HN discussion from 2010: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1554733 Wikipedia entry for the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_Ourselves_to_Death
Thanks! We've changed the URL to that first link from https://otpok.com/2014/01/03/amusing-ourselves-to-death/ . Edit: err never mind, now I see why you included the archive link. Switched to that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something that I believe sets chess aside from most other pursuits (e.g. sports, other games) is the lack of luck; it’s almost all skill. You and your opponent both have everything laid out in front of you, and if you’re skilled enough you can see more than they see, etc etc
There is absolutely randomness and variance in chess. And variance/randomness is important for any sport, that is what makes it exciting and worth playing. If there were no randomness then every game against the same team and players would be the same. And anyway, sports are vastly more complicated than chess is. Just simply dribbling a basketball while bipedal walking is beyond the capability of replication by robot…
Also, there being variance doesn't mean that there is randomness. There is no random element to the game of chess. All the variance comes from human decisions. It's an unsolved game, so there is no way to guarantee a win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is spending equal amounts of cumulative time in 7 second disparate chunks. The book could build to a complex insight. The other strange part of video media is that intimate parasocial relationships it builds.
Books also build intimate parasocial relationships. People feel a sense of loss when finishing a book.
People make too much of what Orwell supposedly feared may happen some day. He was writing about stuff the Soviet and British governments were doing in his time, and in particular, imagined what Soviet rule over Britain may look like. Assigning this philosophy to him and criticizing him for it seems unfair.