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

You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

churchlifejournal.nd.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 243 posts

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#121

Post by foldr »

2019-nCoV wrote: post #116
foldr wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so easy to look words up in a dictionary these days, but for some reason the tech community likes to take a perverse pride in reading at an 8th grade level. "How dare you use a word that happens not to be in my limited vocabulary?"

It is the mark of a charlatan to explain a simple concept in a complex way.

You are seeing conspiracies where there are none. The average humanities professor has spent their life reading books and has a bigger vocabulary than the average programmer. They’re not trying to pull a fast one on you. They just know more words than you do, and are used to talking to people who are familiar with said words.

The sad thing is that none of the words in the quoted passage are obscure at all. If you don’t know at least most of these words, it’s safe to say that you have a poor vocabulary. This is really, really easy to fix if you just change your attitude. Instead of being angry with someone for knowing more words than you, just look up the words that you don’t know.

Then you can respond to what the person is actually saying, instead of unfairly assuming that they're a charlatan.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#122

Post by tomrod »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #104
mdorazio wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically, most people can't and/or shouldn't do this by building a business or working at a startup. Both of these are very risky and won't generally accomplish what I think the parent comment implies. Instead, the more reliable way is to invest as much of your income as you reasonably can in securities like stocks and bonds so that over time you are indeed making money doing nothing. Also, if your company offer…

How does the reasoning of buying stocks and bonds work over time given the current crisis has wiped out all the gains for many people made in the past several years utilizing this strategy, and before that was 2008 which did the same?

Tends to work well, outside black swan events.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#123

Post by lazyjones »

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #41
noir_lord wrote: post #7

Other than the author having the ability to use large words I'm not sure what I was supposed to have come away with from this piece at all, it's just word salad.

Oh my god I'm glad it's not just me. I gave up at: "...the distribution of wealth and popular acquiescence in the vicissitudes of the market—the hoi polloi might vote themselves welfare states or even socialism." Word salad is understatement of the day.

> Word salad is understatement of the day.

It's apparently what every obsessive Marx reader ends up producing. Zizek for example. Perhaps it's a clever tactic to lure defenceless and impressionable minds, perhaps just a form of insanity.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#124

Post by Retric »

foldr wrote: post #109
Retric wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coded language attempts to convey ideas through subtext. By doing so it’s reducing the carrying capacity of the information channel and lets authors pad words without adding meaning. That’s more or less the definition of lazy writing. Like a kid starting off with “It was a dark and stormy night...”

It’s coded only in the sense that you have to know what the words mean to understand what the author is saying. Any piece of writing is “coded” in that sense. Choosing to write in a plodding, completely literal style also conveys a subtext. I'm not sure why you refer to “padding”. “Hoi polloi” is just as concise as any of its less flavorful synomyms (e.g. “common people”). The use of this phrase actually makes the pi…

That’s not what coded language means. I don’t think anything used in the article was obscure. The style depends on making things as clear as humanly possible so readers are beaten over the head with the subtext.

As a simple experiment, take the article and write down the meaning being conveyed including subtext next to it.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#125

Post by tomrod »

I'm not a religious man, but one quote from a religious leader has always stuck out to me. "Interest is a terrific servant and a terrible master."

The polis, bazaar, and pulpit have always been at odds as a triumvirate. My bet is on the bazaar. Even when people are put in jail economics is manifest, using cigarettes or other trinkets as currency for favors and meager supplies. The "market" the author rails against is a strawman.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#126

Post by lotsofpulp »

clarry wrote: post #81
lotsofpulp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First time I’ve read that providing clean water on demand to everyone at a sufficient pressure is “minimal effort”. To me, the infrastructure and experimentation and science that leads to all homes having reliable, potable water is miraculous. There’s very large swaths of the planet where you are supposed to drink only bottled water, from a bottle unsealed in front of you.

> First time I’ve read that providing clean water on demand to everyone at a sufficient pressure is “minimal effort”. Let's look at it from this perspective: what percentage of your country's workforce is actively involved in providing clean water? If it were such a huge effort to provide for relatively basic human needs, then I'd imagine we'd have more people working on that and less people working on advertising, e…

The gist of the argument is that while oxygen is available at no effort, clean, potable water without pathogens and contaminants is certainly not and is a modern miracle. It’s only been a little over 100 years since the discovery of chlorine killing bacteria and whatnot in water.

As for what portion of the population is needed to provide clean water, I don’t see how that is a useful or measurable metric. Certainly the discovery process of cleaning the water, the materials science in creating the pipes, learning about lead poisoning and changing that, and so on and so forth is a huge effort in my books.

Also, going forward, access to clean water is looking like it will be a source of conflict. It’s not in the timescale of the next 5 to 10 years, so people take it for granted, but certainly the grandchildren of today will have to deal with procuring this “effortless” resources.

One might even say the same for oxygen in developing countries where poor people have to live next to factories under a permanent cloud of pollution. They literally can’t go for a run because of a lack of clean air!

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#128

Post by foldr »

Retric wrote: post #124
foldr wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s coded only in the sense that you have to know what the words mean to understand what the author is saying. Any piece of writing is “coded” in that sense. Choosing to write in a plodding, completely literal style also conveys a subtext. I'm not sure why you refer to “padding”. “Hoi polloi” is just as concise as any of its less flavorful synomyms (e.g. “common people”). The use of this phrase actually makes the pi…

That’s not what coded language means. I don’t think anything used in the article was obscure. The style depends on making things as clear as humanly possible so readers are beaten over the head with the subtext. As a simple experiment, take the article and write down the meaning being conveyed including subtext next to it.

Ironically, I genuinely don't understand your last comment.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#129

Post by tomrod »

foldr wrote: post #77
RHSeeger wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could have chosen simpler individual words And they should have. I can put together a sentence using a lot of words most people won't know. It will be a valid sentence, and it will mean what I want it to mean, but a lot of people won't be able to understand what I intended it to mean.

It's so easy to look words up in a dictionary these days, but for some reason the tech community likes to take a perverse pride in reading at an 8th grade level. "How dare you use a word that happens not to be in my limited vocabulary?"

The tech community is used to working under constraints, be it time, compute, storage, etc.

They also are praised when they focus on user experience. Using dense prose is a poor user experience.

I find no fault with their conditioning to be egalitarian.

Post reply on HN