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

Did You Hear We Got Osama?

roshfu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 212 posts

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#31

Post by zalew »

pork wrote: post #17
zalew wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how can you judge two presidential candidates' positions on foreign policy when you don't know what other nations have been up to? If you read/watch American news, you think you actually know what other nations are up to?

Sure you can! Like everything else, you have to pick your sources. I go with NYT and the IHT for "American" sources, and the BBC and Al Jaz, and then occassionally the local newspapers if I'm bored. NYT is quite decent, IMO, although obviously far from perfect.

If you watch AJ/BBC you've probably spotted what my comment was up to. If not, just compare it to their respective US alternatives and you get it. I sometimes click on to mainstream US news just to check what's the POV on foreign affairs and I always feel like there's an echo chamber with a very thick wall (not to mention the quality of journalism), and it's not only the one with F and X in their name. It's a pity though, and what makes me more annoyed is that popular news channels in my country also went that direction.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#32

Post by sedev »

celoyd wrote: post #15
rsinger9 wrote: post #5

How do you responsibly participate in a democracy when you ignore world news? For example, how can you judge two presidential candidates' positions on foreign policy when you don't know what other nations have been up to? The OP doesn't discriminate between junk news, entertainment news, and knowing what is going on in the world.

Argument #1: Presidential candidates are noise. Unless you live in Ohio or Florida, your vote is foregone. If you want to be a good citizen, your time is probably best spent on convincing your friends to vote in local races. Or doing not-explicitly-political work that contributes to justice, peace and prosperity. A small career choice can do a lot more than the most forceful checkmark on a ballot. Argument #2: You pr…

"If you want to overkill, on November 1st you could read the election issue of The Economist cover to cover, whatever political posts are on the front page of HN, and the Wikipedia pages for the major issues. Then sit and think carefully for an hour. This would take about five hours, and I’ll bet $1 you’d vote for the same candidate you would have if you’d read five hours of political news per day for the last year."

I think I'm going to use this method - it's an interesting exercise, and it's a great excuse to get people to stop talking to me about bread-and-circuses politics (e.g. what's discussed in this blog post: http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/000436.html ).

"Argument #1: Presidential candidates are noise. Unless you live in Ohio or Florida, your vote is foregone. If you want to be a good citizen, your time is probably best spent on convincing your friends to vote in local races. Or doing not-explicitly-political work that contributes to justice, peace and prosperity. A small career choice can do a lot more than the most forceful checkmark on a ballot."

This is an uplifting and encouraging message - and a far better argument in favor of anarchism than torching a Starbucks. Thank you.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#33

Post by ithought »

Like everything, it's all about moderation. It's very useful to have something to say in social and work situations.

Spending 10-minutes a week reading pop culture or sports news, or keeping up on what concerts, events etc are coming to your area payoff huge in meeting new friends, dating, building relationships at work and so forth.

Nothing is frivolous except excess.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#34

Post by celoyd »

Karunamon wrote: post #28
celoyd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Argument #1: Presidential candidates are noise. Unless you live in Ohio or Florida, your vote is foregone. If you want to be a good citizen, your time is probably best spent on convincing your friends to vote in local races. Or doing not-explicitly-political work that contributes to justice, peace and prosperity. A small career choice can do a lot more than the most forceful checkmark on a ballot. Argument #2: You pr…

>Unless you live in Ohio or Florida, your vote is foregone. One could make a good argument that this kind of faulty thinking is the reason third party candidates can never get any footing, and also the reason that we get such downright evil people elected. Your vote is not "foregone" unless you choose not to vote. Period.

Oh? What’s the fault in the thinking?

I think it’s not a problem in the utility equation for an individual voter, it’s a problem in the system. By definition, a vote in a non-swing state is insignificant.

Empirically, a good showing for a third-party candidate has no significant effect on the political discourse, and your individual share of giving that candidate a strong showing is negligible.

Voting in the US is badly broken. I strongly favor equal representation, a multiparty system, and other reforms. Part of getting to them is admitting things like my vote, for one, being foregone.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#35

Post by chalst »

rcthompson wrote: post #19
mvkel wrote: post #3

Well put. My only counterpoint: sure, if you want to be 100% productive 100% of the time, don't succumb to distractions. If you see coworkers chatting over a coffee, do you think, "wow, they're being totally unproductive. They don't need those coffees, they should be working!"? Of course not. Consuming _and discussing_ news is a social activity. If your life is your work and nothing else, you'd be a very boring perso…

I don't think your point is at odds with the OP. Even though the OP essentially advocates cutting out all new sources from your life at the end of the article, the real point of the article is to disabuse you of the illusion that these news sources are contributing to your productivity. So, if you want to keep up with the news so you can participate in water cooler discussions and build your social network[1], that's…

I think the OP was saying: try cutting out noise, see what a difference it makes. Then you can better decide what news is worthwhile.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#37

Post by zalew »

slamdunc wrote: post #24
zalew wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how can you judge two presidential candidates' positions on foreign policy when you don't know what other nations have been up to? If you read/watch American news, you think you actually know what other nations are up to?

> If you read/watch American news, you think you actually know what other nations are up to? This reminds me of a recent Daily Show segment that showed how Time magazine offers different cover stories for their international and their US issues on the same date. One example was the Arab Spring (international) and something on "doing chores" for us here in the US.

Yeah, and puppies. Sometimes when I take a glance at American news it looks like there'd be a conspiracy going on not to expose citizens to any issue possibly widening their field of view on world affairs. It's pathetic.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#38

Post by tomjen3 »

rsinger9 wrote: post #5

How do you responsibly participate in a democracy when you ignore world news? For example, how can you judge two presidential candidates' positions on foreign policy when you don't know what other nations have been up to? The OP doesn't discriminate between junk news, entertainment news, and knowing what is going on in the world.

Oh please. Politicians change their positions so much once they are elected that you can't judge what they will do on foreign policy or any other matter.

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#39

Post by absconditus »

peterwwillis wrote: post #20

It is really, really, really, really, really hard for me to find a good temporary distraction nowadays. The noise is so monotonous, so repetitive, so completely devoid of intellectual stimulation that I go between four websites in a loop looking for something interesting to read. HN has maybe one article every two hours that pops up to the top that I find worth reading, and maybe half the time worth upvoting. And tha…

I am not sure what you are looking for specifically, but here are a few ideas:

http://www.aldaily.com/

http://3quarksdaily.com/

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/

http://edge.org/

Re: Did You Hear We Got Osama?

#40

Post by derleth »

kiba wrote: post #23
mvkel wrote: post #3

Well put. My only counterpoint: sure, if you want to be 100% productive 100% of the time, don't succumb to distractions. If you see coworkers chatting over a coffee, do you think, "wow, they're being totally unproductive. They don't need those coffees, they should be working!"? Of course not. Consuming _and discussing_ news is a social activity. If your life is your work and nothing else, you'd be a very boring perso…

Consuming information by choice allows us to express ourselves later with our opinions. Everyone should make an effort to learn about their surroundings to be an informed, contributing member of a democratic society. People say politicians are out of touch, but compared to a lot of Americans who willingly cut off their exposure to news, are they really? If you are not an expert on a political issue. You are uninforme…

> To believe that we can build our society with informed voters in democracies is extremely naive.

To believe we can do anything else is the road back to Dachau.

Post reply on HN