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

Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

spikepuppet.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–157 of 157 posts

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#151

Post by AdieuToLogic »

cardanome wrote: post #119
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, my point is happiness is a choice. There is no sociopolitical statement, no call-to-arms, no pontification as to the measure of one's life, no generational implications. There is an existential consideration, but not of the nature your post implies. Happiness is an individual choice, available to us all at any time. Full stop.

Thank you, your post cured my depression. (Sarcasm) This is pure magical thinking. There are many reasons to be not happy. Being in pain, having lost a loved one, not having your physical needs met and well simply having depression or a myriad of other problems. And people shouldn't be happy with all circumstances. It is not healthy to be happy all the time. Sometimes accepting the negative emotions is important for…

> Thank you, your post cured my depression. (Sarcasm)

Your welcome. (Sarcasm returned)

> This is pure magical thinking. There are many reasons to be not happy. Being in pain, having lost a loved one, not having your physical needs met and well simply having depression or a myriad of other problems.

Of course there are many life situations where "being happy" is not what a person can or needs to experience at that moment, where "moment" is defined as some period of time determined by each person. And there are medical conditions where trying to choose happiness is simply not possible, such as "having depression or a myriad of other problems."

> And people shouldn't be happy with all circumstances. It is not healthy to be happy all the time. Sometimes accepting the negative emotions is important for growth.

I never wrote anything to that effect. What I wrote was:

  Happiness is an individual choice,
  available to us all at any time.
Just because a choice is available does not mandate it must be chosen immediately and unconditionally.

But you go ahead and mischaracterize what I wrote to serve whatever agenda you have and I will reiterate what I posted earlier in this thread:

  My key point is that happiness is a choice.
  I hope everyone can find a way to choose it.

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#152

Post by AdieuToLogic »

balamatom wrote: post #145
cardanome wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CBT and mindfulness can help with SOME problems. It is great when it does but it also can work less well or even harmful for other problems. Especially people that are prone to rumination don't benefit much from it, they need the opposite of mindfulness. The unhinged part was to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking.

>to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort. Magical thinking at least lets a person see that their bullshit isn't working, potentially even walk it back, correct themselves. In ideological thinking, you gotta act as if the impossible wish has already come true . Reality says otherwise? Wel…

>> to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking

I never said nor implied that. It has only been the person with the account name "cardanome" who has applied absolutist determiners such as "all" and "any" to mischaracterize what I wrote.

> Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort.

Projection is a poor position to espouse and one easily identified such as the above, further supported by your previous assertion of "[w]hat you're promoting is a deeply narcissistic worldview."

Reread what I originally wrote in this thread objectively, if either you or "cardanome" can:

  I say;

    Happiness is found in neither a dream chased nor a chosen
    profession.  It is instead a choice we make each day in
    what we do, in how we view same, and if we allow
    ourselves to possess it.

    What constitutes each day is immaterial.

  But that's just me.
This is what is called a personal philosophy[0], specifically:

  2 a : pursuit of wisdom
    b : a search for a general understanding of values and
        reality by chiefly speculative rather than
        observational means
> Woulda had a field day with figuring out what complexes are puppetting AdieuToLogic, if their most coherent argument wasn't "fuck off" - pardon, "full stop".

I was directly replying to this[1] post, which contains phrases such as "I think PP's point was ..", "elites of your heretical society", and "at odds with your own inner values and moral compass".

If you and/or "cardanome" cannot comprehend why I finished with "full stop" in response to this post, then there is nothing I can do to help either or both of you understand.

0 - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/philosophy

1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45410223

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#153

Post by AdieuToLogic »

balamatom wrote: post #144
braebo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re not entirely wrong, and your comment is seemingly unhinged and unprovoked… but there’s a lot of literature on stuff like mindfulness, CBT, and the impact thoughts can have on one’s emotions, especially happiness.

>unhinged and unprovoked I could of course explain exactly what my words "hinge" on, and what "provokes" them. I've found that this does not create understanding where previously it was lacking. So instead let's talk about what you said. Two of your words I consider harmful and insulting: >is seemingly What the hell?! ...oh, right: - If you say "X is Y", you gotta back it up. Scary! - If you say "X seems to me Y", yo…

Put aside anything I have written elsewhere in this thread.

Look at the multiple ad hominem attacks you put forth in the above comment alone. Imagine you are the person to whom you replied when reading it.

All because someone disagreed with a post you authored by writing in part:

  ... your comment is seemingly unhinged and unprovoked ...
I truly hope you reflect on this and can find a way to talk about it with someone.

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#154

Post by balamatom »

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #153
balamatom wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>unhinged and unprovoked I could of course explain exactly what my words "hinge" on, and what "provokes" them. I've found that this does not create understanding where previously it was lacking. So instead let's talk about what you said. Two of your words I consider harmful and insulting: >is seemingly What the hell?! ...oh, right: - If you say "X is Y", you gotta back it up. Scary! - If you say "X seems to me Y", yo…

Put aside anything I have written elsewhere in this thread. Look at the multiple ad hominem attacks you put forth in the above comment alone. Imagine you are the person to whom you replied when reading it. All because someone disagreed with a post you authored by writing in part: ... your comment is seemingly unhinged and unprovoked ... I truly hope you reflect on this and can find a way to talk about it with someone…

Yeah, been that person, with reason and without. Anyway your turn now

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#155

Post by balamatom »

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #152
balamatom wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort. Magical thinking at least lets a person see that their bullshit isn't working, potentially even walk it back, correct themselves. In ideological thinking, you gotta act as if the impossible wish has already come true . Reality says otherwise? Wel…

>> to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking I never said nor implied that. It has only been the person with the account name "cardanome" who has applied absolutist determiners such as "all" and "any" to mischaracterize what I wrote. > Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort. Projection is a poor position to espouse and one easi…

Reread your own post some more. How you found it necessary to exhibit a couple of universally known pieces of horseshit so that your original piece would make sense as some sort of reaction to those. Outstanding.

There's a reason why you're finding it necessary to explain what a personal philosophy even is. Think about that before you go ooh wizdum (and if you have a spare dictionary, throw it up.)

>No, my point is happiness is a choice.

If happiness was a choice, there would be no point to happiness.

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#156

Post by sokoloff »

jasonjmcghee wrote: post #148
sokoloff wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once retrofitted a computer racing game/sim from single-player to multi-player. I thought it was a masterpiece of abusing the C pre-processor to ensure that all variables used for player physics, game state, inputs, and position outputs to the graphics pipeline were guarded with macros to ensure as the (overwhelmingly) single-player titles continued to be developed that the code would remain clean for the two title…

Pain aside, this sounds like an absolute blast.

Even more of a blast was this anecdote from the same effort:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33963859

Re: Go ahead, write the “stupid” code

#157

Post by AdieuToLogic »

balamatom wrote: post #155
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking I never said nor implied that. It has only been the person with the account name "cardanome" who has applied absolutist determiners such as "all" and "any" to mischaracterize what I wrote. > Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort. Projection is a poor position to espouse and one easi…

Reread your own post some more. How you found it necessary to exhibit a couple of universally known pieces of horseshit so that your original piece would make sense as some sort of reaction to those. Outstanding. There's a reason why you're finding it necessary to explain what a personal philosophy even is. Think about that before you go ooh wizdum (and if you have a spare dictionary, throw it up.) >No, my point is h…

> How you found it necessary to exhibit a couple of universally known pieces of horseshit so that your original piece would make sense as some sort of reaction to those. Outstanding.

> There's a reason why you're finding it necessary to explain what a personal philosophy even is. Think about that before you go ooh wizdum (and if you have a spare dictionary, throw it up.)

All you have done in this thread is direct conversations into ad hominem attacks you launch and/or a meaningless non sequitur such as:

> If happiness was a choice, there would be no point to happiness.

As I alluded in a peer comment, I hope you reflect on why you choose this style of communication and have someone in your life you trust in which you confide regarding same.

I am not that person and shall no longer enable your vitriol.

Post reply on HN