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

Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 165 posts

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#51

Post by aje403 »

soneca wrote: post #17

"Billions of people would not exist without him. And yet without him, World War I would have ended years earlier" The article is very interesting, but there is this Hollywood simplistic approach where one man is responsible for all things. The text even mention the Allies developing a poison gas, why not other German chemic? No one other person would be able to discover how to produce amonia? I don't subscribe to thi…

This has nothing to do with Hollywood. Looking at it from that perspective is blind to history and human accomplishment. That's (part of) what our species... does. Is it a good or a bad thing? This would be a very different planet - perhaps without computers or centralized governments or much else, if societies did not place considerable blame or praise on individuals or small groups for large events or discoveries.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#52

Post by jgrowl »

js8 wrote: post #5
loorinm wrote: post #2

What an insane and fascinating read. Two things occured to me: I don’t really understand how and why war happens. Like, it starts out as two parties both wanting the same resource, and then somebody says “over my dead body” or something and then a million other people decide to also join in this fight? I do not get it. The other thing is : The “inherent harm of technology”. Every single advancement will 100% hurt som…

"I don’t really understand how and why war happens." I think we don't really know. We know that greed plays a role, but it is not always the case of someone stronger attacking someone weaker. In Steven Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature, this is shortly discussed. IIRC he says that no reason put forward as an explanation for war can be conclusively proven from the available data (he mentions some war databases cont…

I saw a chaos theory documentary recently that touched on this same thing. It compared the Three-body problem in physics with Franz Ferdinand getting shot. It's truly terrifying to think that a single man making the decision to pull a trigger would send the world to the brink of destruction. Granted the conditions had to be just right to have such a spiraling effect, but it just shows you that the system is so complex that one little thing can tip it over the edge.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#54

Post by nickik »

Hattes wrote: post #19
rocqua wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think generally, long wars are a mistake. My hypothesis. Party A wants Thing from party B. Moreover, party A things they could take it by force. Even if party B things they couldn't defend Thing, they can't just give it, because that sets a wrong precedent. Party B relies on being able to exact a very high toll should party A try to get thing. Rationally, you don't declare a war you don't expect to win. So, in the…

You may very well declare a war that you don't expect to win if you have even worse expectations for a future war. This was pretty much the situation of Germany in WW1, from my understanding.

That was maybe what a couple of people thought. However it is totally wrong, Germany was not in that situation.

Those are the kinds of things you say that already imply 100s of other theories and assumption and then you are like 'We have no choice'.

Germany was in a fantastic geopolitical situation after Bismark but then just fucked it all up because they had all these wrong (and sometimes crazy) assumptions.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#55

Post by JoeAltmaier »

jgrowl wrote: post #52
js8 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don’t really understand how and why war happens." I think we don't really know. We know that greed plays a role, but it is not always the case of someone stronger attacking someone weaker. In Steven Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature, this is shortly discussed. IIRC he says that no reason put forward as an explanation for war can be conclusively proven from the available data (he mentions some war databases cont…

I saw a chaos theory documentary recently that touched on this same thing. It compared the Three-body problem in physics with Franz Ferdinand getting shot. It's truly terrifying to think that a single man making the decision to pull a trigger would send the world to the brink of destruction. Granted the conditions had to be just right to have such a spiraling effect, but it just shows you that the system is so comple…

Historically that's been held up as an interesting pivotal moment. But I don't think it bears scrutiny. Germany was itching to go to war (as a natural outgrowth of their manifest destiny). That shot was an excuse. They would have found another - the world was in turmoil.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#56

Post by nickik »

bsder wrote: post #29
loorinm wrote: post #2

What an insane and fascinating read. Two things occured to me: I don’t really understand how and why war happens. Like, it starts out as two parties both wanting the same resource, and then somebody says “over my dead body” or something and then a million other people decide to also join in this fight? I do not get it. The other thing is : The “inherent harm of technology”. Every single advancement will 100% hurt som…

In the case of World War I, Otto von Bismarck put together an interlocking set of alliances to forge the German Empire. Unfortunately, Wilhelm II was not as capable (I'm being nice--Wilhelm II was an idiot), and didn't know how to manage this properly. It is, of course, possible that even Bismarck could not have continued to manage them given the strains of nationalism that he set in motion. However, Bismarck was ver…

I disagree. The alliances are fine even if you don't manage it usually they just stop, however that is not the same as war.

The reality is simpler, there was a group of people in Austria who wanted war with Serbia, and a group of people in Germany who wanted war with Franz and Russia. Unfortunately for world history those people happen to be in particular places at that time, and so they started the war.

It is really that simple, a number of people wanted war, so they started it.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#58

Post by Tech-Noir »

Hattes wrote: post #19
rocqua wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think generally, long wars are a mistake. My hypothesis. Party A wants Thing from party B. Moreover, party A things they could take it by force. Even if party B things they couldn't defend Thing, they can't just give it, because that sets a wrong precedent. Party B relies on being able to exact a very high toll should party A try to get thing. Rationally, you don't declare a war you don't expect to win. So, in the…

You may very well declare a war that you don't expect to win if you have even worse expectations for a future war. This was pretty much the situation of Germany in WW1, from my understanding.

Or if you believe the superior power will not respond militarily, as in the Falklands in 1982.

Unfortunately for the junta, they weren't the only unpopular right-wing government who saw warfare and jingoism as a handy distraction from internal economic and social problems.

Re: Fritz Haber: A Monster Who Fed the World

#60

Post by heavenlyblue »

jgrowl wrote: post #52
js8 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don’t really understand how and why war happens." I think we don't really know. We know that greed plays a role, but it is not always the case of someone stronger attacking someone weaker. In Steven Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature, this is shortly discussed. IIRC he says that no reason put forward as an explanation for war can be conclusively proven from the available data (he mentions some war databases cont…

I saw a chaos theory documentary recently that touched on this same thing. It compared the Three-body problem in physics with Franz Ferdinand getting shot. It's truly terrifying to think that a single man making the decision to pull a trigger would send the world to the brink of destruction. Granted the conditions had to be just right to have such a spiraling effect, but it just shows you that the system is so comple…

The concept might frighten you, but as the chaos theory also predicts: you probably do know the direction where it is going, and the only thing you can't predict is the sole high-frequency feature of _the_ event that will cause the sudden change.

So it has nothing to do with a "single event", but rather the "pre-conditions" which allow for that single event to evolve into such consequences. Don't blame an idiot who broke a brittle system.

Post reply on HN