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

You are how you act

boz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 199 posts

Re: You are how you act

#181

Post by ratelimitsteve »

some_furry wrote: post #151
ratelimitsteve wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the only reason Alice's intentions matter is their ability to predict her future behavior. if we assume for the sake of argument her behavior will always be identical to bob's then not only does it not matter what her internal motivations are it's arguable that her internal motivations don't actually differ from bob's. Thinking is, after all, an action, and all of their actions are identical. Therefore it seems like…

> Thinking is, after all, an action, and all of their actions are identical. Therefore it seems like your example assumes Alice's behavior both is and isn't identical to Bob's. By your logic, I was heterosexual for my entire young adult life when I actively worked to deceive people from realizing my actual orientation :P People employ dishonesty for lots of reasons, and in myriad ways. Sure, in this thought experimen…

>actions are identical

>actively worked to deceive

that's the contradiction i'm talking about. deception requires effort and planning, it's not just casually doing something. I think that as I explore this I might fundamentally be arguing that saying the same words when you believe them true vs when you believe them false are measurably different, and that the only way for someone to say something falsely in exactly the same way they do truthfully is for them to believe that they're true. You said yourself, you actively tried to deceive people.

As far as using crises to undermine indistinguishability, that was another part of my point: if actions are indistinguishable between two actors we only care about the actors' motivation as an attempt to guess how likely they are to remain indistinguishable. If a crisis causes the two actors to distinguish themselves then, once again, we've undermined the original premise of the experiment.

Re: You are how you act

#182

Post by ruszki »

> you can always decide what to do next.

I think everybody can find examples from their life when this was not true. And not even just simple one like a reaction to a flying object towards your face, but some high level impulses, like when I was in love, I definitely couldn’t control my acts completely. Of course, I was still responsible for my acts, but they were only instincts, no real thinking was involved.

Re: You are how you act

#183

Post by KaiserPro »

Centigonal wrote: post #142
kragen wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it was pretty important and beneficial for someone to tell them so, and Boz ended up being the guy? That doesn't sound like his worst; keeping his mouth shut on other occasions was almost certainly worse.

I think GP is saying that Boz was wrong (he was VP of VR), not the FB staffer he was arguing with. GP should clarify.

Sorry yes, Boz was wrong repeatedly. Specifically in this instance, he was arguing about HR policy, on an HR policy post.

Don't get me wrong, there were, and probably still are, a bunch of entitled pricks who are willing to post about the most stupid shit (I AM SHOCKED!!! that the meat was chewy, etc, etc, etc) but the CTO shouldn't be fighting in the comments section of someone else's back yard, when his own was on fire.

Re: You are how you act

#184

Post by nsagent »

bhouston wrote: post #139
379469378647789 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You are aware that when HRW is talking about the systematic censorship of Palestinian voices by Meta, they are not talking about jihadists. I encourage you to read the article rather than that just repeating prejudices: > "Of the 1,050 cases reviewed for this report, 1,049 involved peaceful content in support of Palestine that was censored or otherwise unduly suppressed, while one case involved removal of content in…

I read the report and it actually made me realize how much of a propaganda campaign HRW was engaging in. It reminded me of PETA campaigns and how offputting many of them were (this is coming from someone who was vegan for 7 years in spite of them).

I know that organizations like HRW and SPLC have to draw attention to topics, but I found the bias and lack of nuance in the report very troubling. The report suffers from the same sort of bias that is so prevalent in most reporting these days, which has gotten to be tiresome.

If HRW reviewed over a thousand cases of censorship, why don't they provide the raw, unedited examples? Instead they include categories of examples, like stating the slogan "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free" was frequently censored. For many that is seen as a call for a different type of genocide, one which HRW gives no indication of whatsoever, simply stating:

  For instance, the words in each of these statements on their face do not constitute incitement to violence, discrimination, or hostility.
It's true that other slogans that were censored are neutral, such as "Ceasefire now" and "Stop the genocide." But lumping the first phrase in as if there were no legimate concerns with it is disingenuous at best.

That said, I'll still support HRW in much of its work, but I hate the tactics that mirror the broad cultural shift to inject more and more biased viewpoints. I really want to go back to the time where bias in the media and nonprofit organizations was much less pronounced in general.

Re: You are how you act

#185

Post by kragen »

KaiserPro wrote: post #183
Centigonal wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think GP is saying that Boz was wrong (he was VP of VR), not the FB staffer he was arguing with. GP should clarify.

Sorry yes, Boz was wrong repeatedly. Specifically in this instance, he was arguing about HR policy, on an HR policy post. Don't get me wrong, there were, and probably still are, a bunch of entitled pricks who are willing to post about the most stupid shit (I AM SHOCKED!!! that the meat was chewy, etc, etc, etc) but the CTO shouldn't be fighting in the comments section of someone else's back yard, when his own was on…

Oh, yeah, that puts a different spin on it.

Re: You are how you act

#186

Post by nsagent »

dang wrote: post #180
bre1010 wrote: post #13

[flagged]

Can we please not play this internet game here? "This is [sarcastic reference] coming from [personal reference] who [cherry-picked outrage bit]" is a trope that doesn't lead anywhere interesting. It ratchets up indignation, fries curiosity, and removes any semblance of ontopicness. Also, I assume that's a skewed pseudo-quotation since no one would actually say that. Please don't play that internet game here either. h…

Agree that the snarky reply doesn't help, but the quotation isn't really skewed (though it is a paraphrase). It comes from an internal memo that leaked in 2018 that states:

  Maybe someone dies in a terrorist attack coordinated on our tools.

  And still we connect people.

  The ugly truth is that we believe in connecting people so deeply that anything that allows us to connect more people more often is *de facto* good.
This comment [1] linked to an article [2] with the leaked memo.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45721016

[2]: https://techthelead.com/incendiary-leaked-memo-facebook/

Re: You are how you act

#187

Post by [deleted] »

lukeasrodgers wrote: post #47

I don't know much about Franklin, but this strikes me as a gross oversimplification of Rousseau, to the point where I wonder whether the author has actually read much Rousseau, rather than just other lightweight "thinky pieces" on Rousseau. For example The Social Contract is significantly concerned with how people can and will act in accordance with the general will. Also the idea that these philosophies are "almost…

[deleted]

Re: You are how you act

#188

Post by skeaker »

vhantz wrote: post #111

> “Fake it until you make it” is often dismissed as shallow, but it’s closer to Franklin’s truth. Faking it long enough is making it. The repetition of behavior, not the sincerity of belief, is what shapes character. You become the kind of person who does the things you repeatedly do. Then you become the kind of person who fakes things?

I have read it in the past as a way to deal with imposter syndrome. You push past it by believing that you're tricking the system by faking it despite your own perceived inadequacy, when in fact you are performing perfectly fine. You do this until the results of your work are evident enough to ward off imposter syndrome. If you are indeed doing bad fake work then I guess this would fall apart, yes.

Re: You are how you act

#189

Post by chipsrafferty »

herval wrote: post #98
KaiserPro wrote: post #63

I do love when Boz espouses opinions. He has got better them over the years, this one is much less teenager trying to sound clever. Which is great, I love to see people grow. The problem with this is that in my professional dealings with him, he has two modes: empathetic & arrogant dick. At his worse he was fighting in the comments section of workplace, telling employees that they are wrong. At his best he is warm an…

My best memory of boz is him arguing with an intern on workspace and calling them "privileged", during COVID, when the kid asked whether the company would provide some sort of cash bonus since the free meals weren't available. "Teenager trying to sound clever" captures every other interaction perfectly.

That sounds pretty fair to me. Having a Meta salary means you can afford to buy food. Having free food on top of a $300,000 income is pretty privileged and complaining about it being taken away even more so.

Re: You are how you act

#190

Post by herval »

chipsrafferty wrote: post #189
herval wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My best memory of boz is him arguing with an intern on workspace and calling them "privileged", during COVID, when the kid asked whether the company would provide some sort of cash bonus since the free meals weren't available. "Teenager trying to sound clever" captures every other interaction perfectly.

That sounds pretty fair to me. Having a Meta salary means you can afford to buy food. Having free food on top of a $300,000 income is pretty privileged and complaining about it being taken away even more so.

Interns don’t make $300k, buddy. At the time, they made ~$6k/mo. And were forced to move to the Bay Area despite the lockdown. To get put down by a dude zooming from his mansion in Hawaii.
Post reply on HN