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

I Met Paul Graham Once

okayfail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#751

Post by countarthur »

brandon272 wrote: post #732
countarthur wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are good points and great questions! Your description of getting surgeries based on a distorted view of what they see in the mirror sounds exactly like gender dysphoria to me. I have a big nose like you and even having had romantic partners compliment me on it hasn't stopped me feeling bad about it, but I agree it's definitely more trivial than believing you ought to be the other sex, somehow. They usually say…

It sounds like we have established that body dysmorphia and gender dysphoria are not really the same thing? Two conditions can have a similar thread but not be the same or even related, nor require the same approach or treatment. In terms of "people being convinced by others", I think this is a relatively recent phenomenon. I think it's possible to be simultaneously concerned about social contagion and social influen…

I agree with absolutely everything you've said here!

Just my alternative conclusion is: you can't fix anything by compelling people to play along with someone else's delusion, whether the source is social, psychological, biochemical, sexual, whatever.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#752

Post by gooosle »

mgraczyk wrote: post #744
gooosle wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It asked for specific metrics backing your claim. Your claim was that tech billionaires contributed more towards the good of society than any other group. You provided a list of metrics that are in no way exclusively attributable to tech billionaires, and no actual data/number on how and how much these are attributable to tech billionaires. Your analogy is completely unrelated too. It's more like if you said 'whales…

What does it mean for a metric to be "attributable" to somebody? For example, is length attributable to me? Is weight attributable to the whale? What are you talking about?

Now you're playing games around the semantics of the word 'attributable'? Lmao

I also love how all of your analogies/examples immediately switched from amazing societal improvements to measurements of physical object characteristics. Truly amusing stuff.

Let's take one of the metrics you suggested - 'number of lives saved' - go ahead and tell me how tech billionaires have saved more lives than any other group.

Or maybe just admit that you're talking out of your ass.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#753

Post by [deleted] »

zestyping wrote: post #661
snowwrestler wrote: post #58

Once upon a time, not that long ago, within my lifetime in fact, being gay was targeted for public abuse the way that transgender people are being targeting now. That has declined as people came to understand that being gay, lesbian, bi is part of how a person is made. Under public pressure, a gay person can act straight or at least act not gay. But it doesn't change who they are, doesn't help anyone around them, and…

> A transgender person is someone who is absolutely miserable when they are not permitted to express the gender they feel. Is that true of everyone who identifies as trans, though? I get the impression there is a subset of trans folks for whom this is the case, and many others (perhaps a majority) who simply prefer to use different pronouns than the ones they started with. I would love to have data that establishes w…

[deleted]

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#754

Post by mgraczyk »

gooosle wrote: post #752
mgraczyk wrote: post #744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does it mean for a metric to be "attributable" to somebody? For example, is length attributable to me? Is weight attributable to the whale? What are you talking about?

Now you're playing games around the semantics of the word 'attributable'? Lmao I also love how all of your analogies/examples immediately switched from amazing societal improvements to measurements of physical object characteristics. Truly amusing stuff. Let's take one of the metrics you suggested - 'number of lives saved' - go ahead and tell me how tech billionaires have saved more lives than any other group. Or may…

I'm trying to simplify it so it's easier to understand. It's not semantics, it's a different category of thing.

Yes the billionaire I listed have saved more lives than 99.999% of humans. They do this by paying for specific individuals to be treated for specific fatal diseases, and by funding research that has led to cures and preventative vaccines that have already saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#755

Post by gooosle »

mgraczyk wrote: post #746
gooosle wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'gave to the world' implies the world didn't have this money before gates came along. Which is obviously not true and quite literally impossible.

In fact the world didn't have this money before. Maybe this is the first time you've encountered the idea that the economy is "positive sum" so think of it like this: Is the value of everything in the world higher or lower than it was 1000 years ago? If it's higher, how did it go up?

Maybe you need to do a quick Google on monetary policy 101 and how money is created. You seem to not understand the basics here.

While you're at it, consider what portion of MS success is directly attributable to Bill Gates and not the many thousands of other people involved in the company and code it literally copied from open source projects. Not to mention the extreme anti-competitveness of MS and their aggressiveness in suing and shutting down other companies, and other negative externalities they generated.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#756

Post by mgraczyk »

gooosle wrote: post #755
mgraczyk wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact the world didn't have this money before. Maybe this is the first time you've encountered the idea that the economy is "positive sum" so think of it like this: Is the value of everything in the world higher or lower than it was 1000 years ago? If it's higher, how did it go up?

Maybe you need to do a quick Google on monetary policy 101 and how money is created. You seem to not understand the basics here. While you're at it, consider what portion of MS success is directly attributable to Bill Gates and not the many thousands of other people involved in the company and code it literally copied from open source projects. Not to mention the extreme anti-competitveness of MS and their aggressive…

Ok let's compare the year 1000 with the year 1500. Do you believe the value of everything in the world increased in those 500 years? There was no monetary policy yet so that isn't the explanation

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#757

Post by gooosle »

mgraczyk wrote: post #754
gooosle wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you're playing games around the semantics of the word 'attributable'? Lmao I also love how all of your analogies/examples immediately switched from amazing societal improvements to measurements of physical object characteristics. Truly amusing stuff. Let's take one of the metrics you suggested - 'number of lives saved' - go ahead and tell me how tech billionaires have saved more lives than any other group. Or may…

I'm trying to simplify it so it's easier to understand. It's not semantics, it's a different category of thing. Yes the billionaire I listed have saved more lives than 99.999% of humans. They do this by paying for specific individuals to be treated for specific fatal diseases, and by funding research that has led to cures and preventative vaccines that have already saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people

You don't seem to understand that your own personal feelings of love towards the 'benevolent billionaire' and their vanity projects do not in any way support your claims. Especially when you're quantifying your claims in such extreme and absurd ways.

You also don't seem to understand that if a team of scientists discovered a cure - that doesn't automatically get 100% attributed to whatever billionaire funded the building the scientists were working in at the time.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#758

Post by [deleted] »

jhp123 wrote: post #282

I'm not a target of tech's fascist turn, but my head is still spinning from the change of direction. When I entered this industry it was for hackers, nonconformists, weirdos, nerds, people who don't care about titles or clothes or what your genitals are. What particularly stings is that the vipers at the top tricked people into giving away an enormous amount of intellectual property. Zuck is removing tampons from the…

[deleted]

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#759

Post by duxup »

cancerhacker wrote: post #551
duxup wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the best advice is to take the ideas, even principles you like from folks and run with that. That's it. I still like a lot of what Steve Jobs had to say at times. I do not pretend to know what he was like IRL or if I would even like him ... doesn't matter. Truth be told folks who take those ideas and principles from others and not carry the weight of those folks as idols, might even do better with them.

I was there, 1986-2006 and by and far what he said internally at company meetings was completely apolitical. He didn’t moralize, he pushed groups to create better products for customers and that’s what we as engineers were exposed to. The one time I remember something different was around 2003 when he was asked at an all hands meeting, a question that came down to “how do we work with all this chaos, war, blaming eth…

TY for the story.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#760

Post by gooosle »

mgraczyk wrote: post #756
gooosle wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you need to do a quick Google on monetary policy 101 and how money is created. You seem to not understand the basics here. While you're at it, consider what portion of MS success is directly attributable to Bill Gates and not the many thousands of other people involved in the company and code it literally copied from open source projects. Not to mention the extreme anti-competitveness of MS and their aggressive…

Ok let's compare the year 1000 with the year 1500. Do you believe the value of everything in the world increased in those 500 years? There was no monetary policy yet so that isn't the explanation

The explanation is the entire human race working diligently to produce, create and grow. Not because king Bobbert the 7th gave some artist some money, and not because king Jeffrey got rich by enslaving/conquering/exploring someone else.
Post reply on HN