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

We've made the world too complicated

user8.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 496 posts

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#481

Post by bit-anarchist »

komali2 wrote: post #435
freeopinion wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some might say that Capitalism (with a capital C) was born in Wealth of Nations. IIUC, you argue it was birthed by Muscovy or BEI some centuries earlier. I argue that capitalism (lower-case) is as old as humans. Was not the shift away from hunter-gatherer a capitalist choice? (Thank you for your comment. I know a discussion about capitalism is completely off-topic, and an explanation of reification is even more off-t…

> argue that capitalism (lower-case) is as old as humans. Was not the shift away from hunter-gatherer a capitalist choice? What's the difference between capitalism and Capitalism? Are you just describing the act of exchanging resources as capitalism? The Soviet Union fed its workers (usually lol), was that exchange of resources "capitalism?" This isn't a really accurate use of terms, and imo is an example of the hype…

And I would like to push back against the idea of "common ownership". Or "collective ownership" in general. How come we say that A, B and C collectively and simultaneously own a resource, but any of them may be alienated from it at any point, presuming a democratic arrangement? Ownership implies final authority, yet none of the individuals actually have it. Instead, it's like a 4th, "juridical", person, who represents the norms and laws binding the members, privately owns it in their stead.

Thus, I'd like to posit that there's no such thing as common ownership, but corporate ownership instead, a subset of private ownership, characteristic of capitalism.

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#482

Post by cdrini »

drivers99 wrote: post #175
cdrini wrote: post #140

Thought-provoking write-up. One part of this is the "meaning of human life". Part of that for me is: humans are the only known lifeform that can look at the stars and try to understand. And, to the best of our understanding, this ability arose from winning a billion biological lotteries, from the blind system of nature and natural selection which by complete coincidence, stumbled on intelligence as a beneficial trait…

But evolution doesn't make those developments improbable or coincidental. I recently read a book called Time's Second Arrow about how selection, when present in systems that can create many combinations, naturally evolve more functional information, which is the number of bits it takes to identify specific combinations that are (in a certain contexts) more functional. (log base 2 of the number of possible combination…

Very interesting book/idea! Adding it to my "to read" list. The more I think about it, there is kind of a two-step process here; entropy creates chaos/disorder, but chaos/disorder creates an environment ripe for kinds of natural selection/complexity build-up. It's almost like an echo or interference pattern or eddy of entropy.

And I think with regards to my initial principle, I think the value is that it came to exist to this extent in one system. That given countless currents/eddies of entropy, a "sand spiral" built up to be miles upon miles tall, where most spirals only made it to a few centimetres before an entropy wave brought them crashing down. Because the "functional bits" in the universe increasing doesn't mean a single sand spiral will get that tall necessarily (unless we assume infinite time?). And if we assume finite time, then that makes this occurrence even more valuable and important to defend, since it's unclear if left to the randomness of entropy/time's arrows if such a buildup of complexity/"functional bits" would occur again before time ends.

Not too sure, those are my initial thoughts, but need to sit with it longer. Thank you for sharing!

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#483

Post by timacles »

bit-anarchist wrote: post #480
timacles wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry to get incensed but I’m shocked in 2026 there are people who think tax is charity. The decades of corporate propaganda and brainwashing and corruption have really played a number on society’s understanding of basic concepts. Tax is a mechanism for the distribution of wealth in a society. USA GDP is 38 trillion dollars and yet 85% of citizens own a tiny fraction of it. Where is all that money going? The gove…

The amount of misconceptions in the comment is what is truly shocking. Tax is not a "mechanism for distribution of wealth" anymore than it is "charity". That's its own form of corporate propaganda/brainwashing only governments and their cronies can provide. It's, in the best terms, a fee you are forced to pay to whoever owns the monopoly over force. In other terms, legalized stealing. This stolen wealth may be redist…

Ok bud your libertarian ideas are fascinating, it’s a shame this website doesn’t have too many high school stoners that would like to explore them.

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#486

Post by [deleted] »

ericmcer wrote: post #476
wolttam wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have actually, as a parent to a young child My kid was about 3 when he figured out what it means to be a good person, and that's all he seems to want to be now. Maybe it's just where I am, but the majority of parents around me also want to raise children who care, and a lot of them seem to be quite successful at it. It was never scoldings, it was "hey, let's think about how it might feel if that happened to you." P…

Yeah that was my point, it needs to be taught. The article seemed to indicate that humans have some innate goodness: "Our internal intuition about right and wrong seems to leave us at an early age". If you agree with that then why do the parents around you need to teach your kids to be good/care. >> "Again, it doesn't feel that hard to me, but I'll respect that it feels alien to other's nature." Thank you for "respec…

[deleted]

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#487

Post by [deleted] »

ericmcer wrote: post #476
wolttam wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have actually, as a parent to a young child My kid was about 3 when he figured out what it means to be a good person, and that's all he seems to want to be now. Maybe it's just where I am, but the majority of parents around me also want to raise children who care, and a lot of them seem to be quite successful at it. It was never scoldings, it was "hey, let's think about how it might feel if that happened to you." P…

Yeah that was my point, it needs to be taught. The article seemed to indicate that humans have some innate goodness: "Our internal intuition about right and wrong seems to leave us at an early age". If you agree with that then why do the parents around you need to teach your kids to be good/care. >> "Again, it doesn't feel that hard to me, but I'll respect that it feels alien to other's nature." Thank you for "respec…

[deleted]

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#488

Post by [deleted] »

ericmcer wrote: post #476
wolttam wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have actually, as a parent to a young child My kid was about 3 when he figured out what it means to be a good person, and that's all he seems to want to be now. Maybe it's just where I am, but the majority of parents around me also want to raise children who care, and a lot of them seem to be quite successful at it. It was never scoldings, it was "hey, let's think about how it might feel if that happened to you." P…

Yeah that was my point, it needs to be taught. The article seemed to indicate that humans have some innate goodness: "Our internal intuition about right and wrong seems to leave us at an early age". If you agree with that then why do the parents around you need to teach your kids to be good/care. >> "Again, it doesn't feel that hard to me, but I'll respect that it feels alien to other's nature." Thank you for "respec…

[deleted]

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#489

Post by wolttam »

ericmcer wrote: post #476
wolttam wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have actually, as a parent to a young child My kid was about 3 when he figured out what it means to be a good person, and that's all he seems to want to be now. Maybe it's just where I am, but the majority of parents around me also want to raise children who care, and a lot of them seem to be quite successful at it. It was never scoldings, it was "hey, let's think about how it might feel if that happened to you." P…

Yeah that was my point, it needs to be taught. The article seemed to indicate that humans have some innate goodness: "Our internal intuition about right and wrong seems to leave us at an early age". If you agree with that then why do the parents around you need to teach your kids to be good/care. >> "Again, it doesn't feel that hard to me, but I'll respect that it feels alien to other's nature." Thank you for "respec…

I feel like my comment was either misconstrued or misunderstood and don’t have anything to respond after the inflammation at the end of your comment there.

For the record, I don’t know anything about you or your kids.

Re: We've made the world too complicated

#490

Post by bit-anarchist »

timacles wrote: post #483
bit-anarchist wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of misconceptions in the comment is what is truly shocking. Tax is not a "mechanism for distribution of wealth" anymore than it is "charity". That's its own form of corporate propaganda/brainwashing only governments and their cronies can provide. It's, in the best terms, a fee you are forced to pay to whoever owns the monopoly over force. In other terms, legalized stealing. This stolen wealth may be redist…

Ok bud your libertarian ideas are fascinating, it’s a shame this website doesn’t have too many high school stoners that would like to explore them.

Sure, but GDP not being a measurement of wealth is not a libertarian idea. Its creator warned us against using it as such when invented.
Post reply on HN