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

Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 110 posts

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#61

Post by eli_gottlieb »

bjorn2404 wrote: post #30
qdog wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people I've met who claim to be Libertarians seems to be very confused about how the world works. Usually, they have a pet idea (guns, pot, taxes, property rights, police forces, something) they are very hot about and fail to extend their logic out to the endpoint, ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals (I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwoo…

"get rid of all law enforcment..." Are you confusing libertarianism with anarchism?

No. Anarchism is against hierarchy, libertarians are against government. Libertarians are usually proprietarians (called "anarcho-capitalists" sometimes), people who think that properly-extended property relations/rights can solve every governance problem.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#62

Post by mindcrime »

hindsightbias wrote: post #25
leot wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generalizations have their place. A big problem many have with right-wing libertarians is that, unlike other political philosophies, libertarianism seems more like an elaborate, and status-reinforcing, justification for one's own socioeconomic position. To believe otherwise -- i.e., to believe that merit is largely a fiction, albeit a highly adaptive one -- would mean giving up far too much.

The day a libertarian realizes the world is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue.

The day a libertarian realizes the world is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue

Very few, if any, libertarians believe that "the world is comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors." Some consequentialist libertarians whose arguments for the libertarian position are rooted in economics might almost argue that, but deontological libertarians hold to libertarian principles because they believe that the initiation of force or fraud is simply immoral.

And quite a few of us hold to libertarian positions because we've seen the damage caused by government.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#63

Post by eli_gottlieb »

jsnk wrote: post #14
qdog wrote: post #12

That article read like The Great Gatsby, I gave up after a few paragraphs. I don't think I'm into idolizing rich people anymore, I probably would have devoured this in high school, though.

What is it about a person being rich that bothers you?

Being rich is no problem. Acting like being rich means you're better than other people (or smarter, more hard-working, or even luckier, anything other than richer) is a huge problem, because it leads to a kind of economically-driven idolatry.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#64

Post by sp332 »

guelo wrote: post #59
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the day a liberal realizes the government is not comprised of sets of well meaning rational actors is the day they get a clue. I can play this game too! You should maybe try one day a week where you don't act like a condescending prick. You might find it liberating.

Why a liberal? Conservatives also believe in government.

Actually, I think the idea is that conservatives are distrustful of government and are keen to limit its power and influence in their lives.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#65

Post by calinet6 »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #38
calinet6 wrote: post #4

"I asked what the poles of the oscillation were. “It’s uh—it’s the, uh—it’s the—it’s um—it’s probably, uh—it’s probably just that it’s not that—well, the pro-seat-belt argument is that it’s safer, and the anti-seat-belt argument is that if you know that it’s not as safe you’ll be a more careful driver.” He made a left turn and fastened his seat belt. “Empirically, it’s actually the safest if you wear a seat belt and…

> the hilariously false core of libertarianism. They're a class of abstract thinkers stuck in an imperfect world where their theories will always be unapologetically shattered by complex and unpredictable realities. Also, most of these hardcore libertarians seem to be, basically, robots. They are people from a biologic standpoint, but lacking humanity. If you're asking yourself right now "what the hell does he mean",…

This is anecdotal, but the one hardcore libertarian I knew fit this stereotype perfectly.

We all have varying degrees of empathy and ability to understand and act on the intentions and emotions of others, but those of us who are on the lowest end of the empathy scale tend toward libertarian ideals. It is no coincidence.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#66

Post by pcopley »

godarderik wrote: post #50
dxbydt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Indian high schools, you are supposed to memorize a ton of "useless" shit like atomic weights of 50+ elements in the periodic table, logs upto 20, exponentials, factorials, avogardo constant & tons of physics constants like g and speed of light & sound & diffraction constants & the like. So from the age of 12,I happen to know that log 5 is 0.7 Ergo, log(125^100) = 300log(5) = 210, hence 210 digits in 125^100. But…

Current high schooler in the US here. I feel that today the trend is definitely more towards looking things up as opposed to memorizing them. For example, in my chemistry class, we always got a periodic table (with weights) and were given things like Planck's constant. We did, however, have to memorize some of the more basic ones such as speed of light and Avogadro's number. With regards to math, all tests involving…

Wasn't it Einstein who said something along the lines of "Don't memorize anything you can look up?"

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#67

Post by mindcrime »

qdog wrote: post #19
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They're a class of abstract thinkers stuck in an imperfect world where their theories will always be unapologetically shattered by complex and unpredictable realities." First, this is a blanket ad hominem about an entire group of people. Second, it's bullshit. There's nothing wrong with being a pragmatic libertarian. In fact, that's the way it's supposed to work. It's the purists on all sides of issues that present…

Most people I've met who claim to be Libertarians seems to be very confused about how the world works. Usually, they have a pet idea (guns, pot, taxes, property rights, police forces, something) they are very hot about and fail to extend their logic out to the endpoint, ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals (I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwoo…

FWIW, I'm very much a libertarian and spend a lot of time with other libertarians, and I don't know a single one who would contend that

"ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals".

What we might contend is that the current system doesn't do much to stop criminal from being criminals and probably (actually, almost certainly) creates even more criminals, and has all sorts of unintended consequences in the process... We might also contend that modern day law enforcement is largely reactive and does very little to stop crimes from happening, and that individuals should take on some degree of personal responsibility in terms of protecting themselves and their property.

I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwood, not really my ideal life)

Yeah, few libertarians contend that a "libertarian world" would be a "libertarian utopia" (as our detractors like to suggest)... we just argue that it would be a great deal better than the current system in many ways, and perhaps worse in some ways... but that the gain in freedom more than makes up for whatever failings such a society would have.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#68

Post by clavalle »

no_flags wrote: post #35
qdog wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people I've met who claim to be Libertarians seems to be very confused about how the world works. Usually, they have a pet idea (guns, pot, taxes, property rights, police forces, something) they are very hot about and fail to extend their logic out to the endpoint, ie: get rid of all law enforcment some magic is going to happen and criminals won't be criminals (I suspect life would be a lot like the show Deadwoo…

Many of us do follow the logic to its necessary conclusion. We don't assume criminals will magically disappear, we just would like law and order to be provided by the free market. See below before you dismiss it as impossible. http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm Edit: And I apologize for the background of that link!

The problem with this theory is that it assumes a couple of things:

1) The market fully defined by exchanges underwritten by currency (read: a fluid medium of exchange).

2) Value can be assigned to anything and is therefore finite in all circumstances.

But there is a singularity where it all breaks down:

The value of one's life is infinite. Without it, no other value matters. If I could give you $10 trillion but I kill you 60 seconds afterward, what value does it have?

One's life cannot be underwritten by currency because currency is finite. Therefore the market as defined as an exchange of value underwritten by currency is inadequate for any exchange where one's continued life is a factor.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#69

Post by calinet6 »

jsnk wrote: post #14
qdog wrote: post #12

That article read like The Great Gatsby, I gave up after a few paragraphs. I don't think I'm into idolizing rich people anymore, I probably would have devoured this in high school, though.

What is it about a person being rich that bothers you?

You cannot deny it carries with it certain effects and consequences, and debatably, pre-existing personality traits.

Re: Peter Thiel's Rise to Wealth and Libertarian Futurism

#70

Post by mindcrime »

Today, the sci-fi novels of the sixties feel like artifacts from a distant age. “One way you can describe the collapse of the idea of the future is the collapse of science fiction,” Thiel said. “Now it’s either about technology that doesn’t work or about technology that’s used in bad ways. The anthology of the top twenty-five sci-fi stories in 1970 was, like, ‘Me and my friend the robot went for a walk on the moon,’ and in 2008 it was, like, ‘The galaxy is run by a fundamentalist Islamic confederacy, and there are people who are hunting planets and killing them for fun.’"

You know, I think he's on to something there. Modern sci-fi really doesn't seem to have a whole lot left to say about potential advances in technology, and the tone does seem to have shifted away from the optimism of yesteryear. The best new scifi I've read lately was a post-apocalyptic zombie story trilogy, for crying out loud.

Post reply on HN