61–70 of 85 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump's unique characteristics were antithetical to the role of POTUS. Now cult leader, on the other hand...
The only thing about Trump that is antithetical to the role of POTUS, at least in the coastal elite / media sense, is that he ran as a Republican.
(2018)
> Easier to conceive of Mark Zuckerberg as a machine. The memes of Zuckerberg as Data from Star Trek always amuse me.[0] Sure, it's teasing, but Data is a likable character! Data doesn't strive to be superior but to be more human, even if this means being analytical instead of emotional. Mark Zuckerberg would be far more interesting if he were "evil"--if he tried to create new values, if he tried to replace God. But…
Frankly, I would take a machine as an leader over a lot of other options we have. Predictability and lack of emotional outbursts would be great qualities to have in a leader.
Zorlot-19 has decided to end the lives of everyone over 90 and that drinks mountain dew because its determined its a net negative on.. what, GDP, mortality rate, fertility rates, tax rates..
Seems like a compassionate overlord would be great but we've fallen for that a few thousand times in history.
edit: While I'm here, anyone have any interesting books on robots/droids/overlords/whatever beginning to manage society?
edit2: Found this; https://www.barnesandnoble.com/blog/sci-fi-fantasy/a-reading...
Does anyone really believe he could be elected president someday? (mentioned in the article)
Just those who will make it their business to believe it’s possible (politcal consultants). Exhibit A: Bloomberg campaign If they were eligible, Schwarzeneggar (years ago) or Musk (now), would have a better shot —- still small —- because it would be a circus. And we have evidence that a circus can get you elected.
There is a parallel reality where Democrats pushed hard to change the eligibility rules during Obama’s second term, selected Ahnold, and continued the Obama legacy of slow-going, moderate social progress. Sadly we are in a darker timeline.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wanted say no, but we did get Trump. So Zuck being President seems like a real possibility.
Being famous and rich is not what got Trump in and the factors that got him in would be somewhat different for a liberal. And in the general factors that matter for a president, Zuck has about 0 of the ones that matter (charisma, likeability, relatability, toughness, outspokenness, bluster, comedy, incisiveness, a relatable or admirable background, etc). He’s a privileged rich white kid on the spectrum, I give less-t…
More here: https://medium.com/@sanfordschram_87074/racial-diversity-696...
Public figures of this sort become cartoon characters [1]. The way we relate to them reminds me of how the Greeks used to talk about their gods, and at times also of the feces-hurling behavior in other primates. I don't mean that dismissively, I mean it almost literally (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23406290). These discussions are fascinating because they're so repetitive and so consistent. But their content is not interesting, because they're not about content. They're deep social behavior.
It's always been a principle on HN to emphasize content over personalities [2], and that principle has served well over the years. I think I've learned something about why: it's because intellectual curiosity and social curiosity are different things. Social curiosity is what lies behind gossip, fascination with celebrities, and so on—the lives of others, if it's ok to adapt that phrase. Intellectual curiosity has to do with expanding one's view of the world. Both are deeply human, but HN is a site specifically for intellectual curiosity. That explains why articles and threads like this invariably miss the bullseye here.
[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... - I recalled using this phrase further back, too, and found it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6429252 - 7 years ago, and also about Zuckerberg.
[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wanted say no, but we did get Trump. So Zuck being President seems like a real possibility.
Being famous and rich is not what got Trump in and the factors that got him in would be somewhat different for a liberal. And in the general factors that matter for a president, Zuck has about 0 of the ones that matter (charisma, likeability, relatability, toughness, outspokenness, bluster, comedy, incisiveness, a relatable or admirable background, etc). He’s a privileged rich white kid on the spectrum, I give less-t…
Trump or Zuckerberg?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wanted say no, but we did get Trump. So Zuck being President seems like a real possibility.
Being famous and rich is not what got Trump in and the factors that got him in would be somewhat different for a liberal. And in the general factors that matter for a president, Zuck has about 0 of the ones that matter (charisma, likeability, relatability, toughness, outspokenness, bluster, comedy, incisiveness, a relatable or admirable background, etc). He’s a privileged rich white kid on the spectrum, I give less-t…
Does anyone really believe he could be elected president someday? (mentioned in the article)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck could 100% be elected president someday. It certainly seems more plausible than I would have said about Trump in say ~2012. - The US worships rich and successful businessmen in general. - Facebook is the most powerful media empire the world has ever know. It could easily mobilize to support a Zuck campaign. - His charisma and current reputation are obviously votes against him but reputation is malleable (see pre…
Yeah, let's start by not worshiping rich businessmen.