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

The Forbidden Island

neatorama.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 288 posts

Re: The Forbidden Island

#121

Post by devb »

Anderkent wrote: post #109
pcrh wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't anyone think of the children? /s

If someone was raising their children in a similar quality of life in a western society, they would have their children taken away by social security. Do you disagree?

Because of the conditions, or because of how far removed their lifestyle is from western societal norms?

What if the tribe decided our children were being severely mistreated with glowing distraction screens, processed corn sugar, helicopter parenting, etc.? Surely you'd let them take our kids away.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#122

Post by wslh »

Anderkent wrote: post #87
userulluipeste wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The (Star Trek's) Prime Directive is not something worthwhile to be considered here? The representatives of these people (the ones with bows and other kind of weapons that dare to face the outsiders) are stating clearly their policy. Maybe it is us that must get over our desires to intrude supposedly on someone else's benefit.

The representatives of these people are hardly in a situation where they can make an informed decision. Even if they were, they have no right of condemning their children to such life.

Informed decisions are inside our rational [and egocentric] limitations, so in this case not take those decisions very seriously.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#123

Post by knowaveragejoe »

Anderkent wrote: post #91
alan_cx wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A. Yeah, except we never tell them the down side. We arrogantly assume our oh so clever technical ways are better. Sadly we are still not mature enough to decently make contact with such people.

You can't be serious. How many children are you willing to condemn to extremely premature death because of your noble savage illusion? Yes, our 'oh so clever technical ways' are not perfect. But they are so much better. Perhaps these people are just as happy as we are. Even so, their stillborn children are still dead. They almost certainly see more murder and rape. How can you condemn people to living like that, even…

* Childhood diseases

* Stillborn children

* Murder

* Rape

Good point. Since in joining modern society they'd be missing out on those things those things that no longer ever occur, a fair trade would be to introduce them to consumerism and all of the lovely, healthy, meaningful things that includes.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#124

Post by JonSkeptic »

>members of a hunter-gatherer tribe that has lived on the island for 65,000 years.

>It's estimated the the 28-square-mile island (slightly larger than Manhattan) is capable of supporting as many as 400 hunter-gatherers, but no one knows how many people live there.

Did anyone else read that and think "That is a lot of inbreeding."?

Re: The Forbidden Island

#125

Post by ekianjo »

Ygg2 wrote: post #111
ekianjo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You focus on the wrong thing. It's not about inequality, it's obvious that the rich should get richer faster. You don't expect the rich to have a 1 dollar salary increase while the poor gets the same thing. Obviously not. So, of course the gap is widening. And it's not necessarily a problem, because even the super rich can't spend all of what they earn, and that money ends up being recycled in the economy (investment…

What?! It's all about inequality. The problem isn't everyone is getting richer it's that some are getting waaaay richer than other, they are grabbing the powers, making decisions and isolating themselves from the consequences of those decisions. You can drain a lake for thing X until your lake runs dry. Who is least susceptible to change? Those with money . Either they move or they buy water). The high Gini coefficie…

Not much social unrest in the past 50 years in all developed countries where inequalities have been growing when everyone gets richer.

And wealth is not a Lake. It does not run dry. You can create wealth. If wealth could not be created we would be super poor by now with 7 billion people on the planet compared to 100 years ago. But it's the exact opposite, we are hundred time richer than 100 years ago.

When everyone earns a little more than before over time, there's not so much cause for social unrest. Countries with growing economies tend to be more stable and peaceful Revolutions occur when people get poorer and lose hope for a better future.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#126

Post by Anderkent »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #123
Anderkent wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't be serious. How many children are you willing to condemn to extremely premature death because of your noble savage illusion? Yes, our 'oh so clever technical ways' are not perfect. But they are so much better. Perhaps these people are just as happy as we are. Even so, their stillborn children are still dead. They almost certainly see more murder and rape. How can you condemn people to living like that, even…

* Childhood diseases * Stillborn children * Murder * Rape Good point. Since in joining modern society they'd be missing out on those things those things that no longer ever occur, a fair trade would be to introduce them to consumerism and all of the lovely, healthy, meaningful things that includes.

Are you suggesting they are as common in the modern society as they are in a savage one?

Re: The Forbidden Island

#127

Post by cubancigar11 »

eshvk wrote: post #48
hingisundhorsa wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long do we think this Indian protection of this island will last? The current Indian government, who Indian colleagues tell me is led by a mafia related Italian family, is one of the most corrupt in the world. It is only a matter of time before whichever intelligent anthropologist in the bureaucracy/judicary is currently protecting them falls by the wayside.

I am curious. What is the purpose of your comment? > How long do we think this Indian protection of this island will last? Is this a rhetorical question? A call to arms so that someone "more responsible" takes over the island and helps protect the "noble savage"? Or did you want an actual response? > mafia related Italian family Did you mean the Italian mafia? Because the only references to such a thing that I can fi…

I suppose what he/she means is that they are running it like a Mafia.

'was the fact they were "Italian" supposed to count against them?'

Shouldn't it? Specially in an article where uncontacted people, literally, kill people to avoid being contacted?

Re: The Forbidden Island

#128

Post by pilom »

pcrh wrote: post #120
Anderkent wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone was raising their children in a similar quality of life in a western society, they would have their children taken away by social security. Do you disagree?

For one, we don't know enough about their quality of life to say anything about it. I would assume they have a better quality of life than the majority of the planet, in particular it is likely to be better than the majority of urban dwellers and subsistence farmers in the 3rd world. If you wanted to give them the quality of life enjoyed in the nicer parts of the US or Europe you would have to provide all those ameni…

"I would assume they have a better quality of life than the majority of the planet"

I'd agree with you that they probably have a more enjoyable day to day experience, however I also would bet that they have an infant mortality rate that is astronomical even by 3rd world standards. And that they have an average life expectancy which isn't hard to beat in the 3rd world. I'm not saying that these 2 things justify us forcing contact with them, just that it is hard for someone to justify that lower infant mortality and higher life expectancy are always positive things for our species to strive for. Its not just an issue of culture.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#129

Post by king_jester »

Anderkent wrote: post #107
geuis wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you dare bring out the fucking "oh the children" argument. People die all the fucking time . Its what people do, we die. These people, if the suppositions are to be believed, have been able to survive and reproduce for tens of thousands of years. They don't need your pity or "help". If you sit back for an hour or so and re-read your comment 10-20 times, you'll realize what a Western missionary statement it is.…

> People die all the fucking time. Its what people do, we die. Yes, and it's a problem! We should be doing everything we can so that people finally STOP DYING. And we should strive especially hard when it's children dying because their parents are too used to everyone dying to ASK FOR HELP. Now, in some cases it's difficult. We can't do it for everyone just yet. But in this case it's not. >These people, if the suppos…

> Yes, and it's a problem! We should be doing everything we can so that people finally STOP DYING.

There is a difference between dying as a result of problems in our society and dying as the inevitable result of having been born. Societies generally have fix their own issues, other people cannot do it for them. As outsiders who know nothing of the society of the people living on this island, we cannot and should not attempt to change their society to a way we feel more appropriate, that is literally genocide.

Re: The Forbidden Island

#130

Post by king_jester »

VMG wrote: post #59
dirktheman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your point, and I think we can all agree that our standards of living are WAY better than theirs, but by OUR standards. Yes, our life expectancy is better, we have better teeth, we are healthier, we get to use all the shiny stuff that comes with our civilization. But those are our standards, not theirs. So there's no 'winner' here. Look at native Americans. They were also 'savages', and we didn't do very well i…

> But those are our standards, not theirs I think it is fair to assume that health and life are universal standards. I'm willing to bet on in.

What does this even mean? Talking in platitudes about health and life are all fine and dandy, and yet the in US there are tremendous issues with poverty, health care access, and control of one's own body. Societies do things very differently even if they say they promote life or health, but that kind if wishy washy dialog is useless, what matters are the details.
Post reply on HN