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

Harold and George Destroy the World

tomclancy.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 322 posts

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#101

Post by echelon »

skybrian wrote: post #76
alecco wrote: post #16

The effects of Idiocracy are much worse than we appreciate. I believe it's hidden in part by technology (as a cognitive crutch) and part by top skilled immigration (people previously suppressed in their undeveloped countries). And education is much, much worse almost everywhere by leaning more to memorization and catering to the lowest common denominator. Student A is bad at math and good at language, student B is th…

Possibly things are worse, but here’s an argument that we’ve gotten unrealistically ambitious about universal education through college: What People Want From Our Schools Has Never Been Accomplished, Anywhere, Ever https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/what-people-want-from-o...

College and school are super suboptimal at dispensing education.

We keep smart kids co-mingled with disruptive kids and bullies. We need to do what Asian countries do - entrance exams at every level.

We don't let kids excel at their interest area. Math and science, obviously, but we lack programs for entrepreneurship and leadership that might be better for kids that aren't STEM-focused. Something like a scouts-type program that teaches them business, accounting, management, leadership. Sports and the arts are pretty well covered, though.

If you're born poor and/or without interested parents, the system doesn't help mobility much. Kids gravitate to the environments they live in, and school doesn't shelter them from this.

College itself is a bubble for many degree programs. It's fantastic for hands-on sciences, but useless for career development in liberal arts. It will put you into debt if you're not already wealthy. We need to subsidize STEM and reintroduce college loan dischargeability so risk to lenders is back in the equation.

Programs are too expensive. Universities sell themselves as "experiences". Amenities, facilities, day spas. Admins are too big. Kids are taking degrees they shouldn't.

Grad programs are also inefficient. Academic publishing, the research and grant treadmill, not letting smart students immigrate, ...

The whole thing needs to be gutted and rewritten. From early childhood to post-grad.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#102

Post by genthree »

ericmcer wrote: post #41

The author framed this as if "One Battle After Another" was some adult work and they couldn't watch "Predator" afterwards because it was so childish. I had the opposite reaction and could barely make it through 15m of One Battle. The movie opens with women in skin tight dresses and mini skirts with automatic weapons robbing banks and breaking into migrant detention centers while yelling "this is what real power looks…

I bounced off it in about the same amount of time, just the other day. I’ll probably return to it at some point given how talked-about it is, but as soon as the woman was revealed to be pregnant the implicit “ho ho! Who’s the father?!” made my eyes roll so hard it knocked me right out of the movie.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#103

Post by api »

SomeHacker44 wrote: post #32
api wrote: post #12

One thing you learn growing up is that there, in a sense, are no such thing as grownups. Nobody knows what they are doing in the sense we think they do when we are kids.

I agree to a large extent. Yet, what we see going on in US political leadership truly is beyond my belief of what reasonable adults should do and act like, even as an (precocious, sharp) ex-child.

Yes, it’s next level and clearly a period of decline. This is Nero and Caligula stuff. We’ve been sliding this way for a while.

It doesn’t mean this is the end of the USA. All civilizations go through ups and downs. This is, at least culturally and politically, a down.

I also think it’s global though. The US is manifesting it clearly and starkly, but that’s kind of US style. Authoritarianism backed by populist grievance politics and venal corruption are on the rise around the world.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#104

Post by lucianbr »

designerarvid wrote: post #83
raincole wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something being old doesn't meant it's false. It even has a name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_novelty

People have predicted the end of the world for literally thousands of years. Should’ve happened by now, right?

There's a first time for everything, and an end to most things. The roman empire lasted hundreds of years, and then it ended. Many empires did. The sun will end too, at some point. Ice ages last for thousands of years, then they end. And there are countless other examples.

"X has lasted a long time so it will last more" is so obviously wrong. Think about it for more than 3 seconds.

Or was it sarcasm? I can't tell anymore.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#105

Post by BirAdam »

SomeHacker44 wrote: post #32
api wrote: post #12

One thing you learn growing up is that there, in a sense, are no such thing as grownups. Nobody knows what they are doing in the sense we think they do when we are kids.

I agree to a large extent. Yet, what we see going on in US political leadership truly is beyond my belief of what reasonable adults should do and act like, even as an (precocious, sharp) ex-child.

If I remove my own political leanings, this group just completely dropped the mask.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#106

Post by afavour »

randallsquared wrote: post #66

The "silver dollar" change isn't -- it's the dime. The design was in the works before the current administration [1], and is only intended to be for the 250th anniversary [2]. The Dept of Defense was only created in the late 1940s. Before that the US had the Dept of War, the Dept of the Navy, and other organizations. The point of calling it "defense" was not because "everyone has the right to defense", but because th…

> as the current preferred name "Dept of War" is now for a different posture with regard to America's adversaries.

…which is the bad thing being discussed, yes. I don’t really understand why “there used to be one” would be exonerative. Not to mention, they didn’t rename it, that requires an act of Congress. Instead they just told everyone to change which name they use. Lines up with the “adult children” theory. Skip the actual work, (which would involve addressing the nation and justifying this change in posture), instead focus on the performative.

As we are seeing in real time with Iran, “we’ll just war!” was a juvenile idea, committed to with near-zero forethought or planning.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#107

Post by kjksf »

jrmg wrote: post #50
some_random wrote: post #39

I was totally with it until they started talking about the real world again. The Department of War was called that up until 1947 when it was renamed to the euphemistic Department of Defense (or more specifically merged with the Department of the Navy which was previously separate). It has nothing to do with the right to self defense, the undermining of which would make a great paragraph here comparing modern self def…

Just because something was done before doesn’t mean it’s good (obviously?) The purpose of the Department of Defense should be to defend America and Americans. Waging war is an unfortunate necessity that stems from this sometimes. War is not the only threat that can require a military response, and should never be a goal. No matter how you swing it, having a ‘Department of X’ definitely gives the impression - to peopl…

Since 1947 US has been involved in 5 major wars (Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Afganistan, Iraq).

Which begs the question: do you think it's more "moral" to wage wars and lie to public that you're in the business of defense OR say things that are truthful?

Spending trillion+ dollars on military is about the only thing that both political party agree on. Obama bombed more countries that most presidents.

Since we're talking about adults thinking like children: your simplistic ideas about what military should be have no effect on what it is.

If Iran had the firepower superiority over Israel and U.S. they would level both countries. This is no me saying. "Death to America" is a literal quote from now-dead ayatollah.

When you actually listen why they renamed DoD to DoW it's way more nuanced that you apparently believe.

One of the reasons is that political correctness is destructive in military. If you're actually at war, winning should be objective not PR optics.

And it seems to be working. See disaster of Afghanistan withdrawal compared to astonishing success of snatching Maduro and destroying Iran's capability to wage future wars.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#108

Post by dgsii »

rayiner wrote: post #49
throw310822 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There can be also a softer version of it, which is that cultural richness and focus on education are easily transmitted within families. A society that doesn't value culture and education is going to produce less educated families with even less educated children.

It’s also true that IQ is both real and highly heritable. The military uses what’s essentially an IQ test to screen out the bottom 15% or so of the population: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/after-service/201801... . The military has found that people with aptitude test scores below the cutoff can’t be trained to competently perform any job in the military. IQ is also highly heritable: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.n…

Ah, yes, the IQ test; the universal, unbiased gauge of intellect across all cultures.

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#109

Post by throwaway743 »

boogieknite wrote: post #84
Configure0251 wrote: post #9

No need to do a drive by on Predator Badlands like that, it's a perfectly enjoyable film in its own right. I agree with the author though, there's nothing nearly as emotionally deep or socio-politically engaging as One Battle After Another, and so it would make for poor choice as a double feature to run second in the pairing.

thank you! spoiler alert if anyone hasnt seen Predator Badlands Tom self owns himself quite a bit by dismissing a movie as drivel and then comparing it to dumb plots made by adult children. the entire point of the movie is to demonstrate how dumb and bad overt masculinity is. yes its oversimplified but its Predator. the audience is hormonal teenage boys who might think toxic masculinity is cool. the entire setup Tom…

I see your take but I took it as "don't limit yourself to the confines of tradition and culture, open yourself up to others, go your own path, do the right thing, and make friends along the way to enrichen your life and meaning".

Re: Harold and George Destroy the World

#110

Post by danabramov »

Configure0251 wrote: post #9

No need to do a drive by on Predator Badlands like that, it's a perfectly enjoyable film in its own right. I agree with the author though, there's nothing nearly as emotionally deep or socio-politically engaging as One Battle After Another, and so it would make for poor choice as a double feature to run second in the pairing.

Coincidentally I just watched OBAA yesterday and found it very lacking. I’m so surprised by the positive reception. Great visual, acting and music, but I found almost no emotion in it because none of the conflicts it sets up actually resolve on screen. Characters don’t confront consequences of their choices and don’t grow.
Post reply on HN