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

Why the Luddites Matter

librarianshipwreck.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 131 posts

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#71

Post by gaius »

FrozenVoid wrote: post #67

Luddites are just people disempowered by automation and capitalism: if its cheaper to use machines than people, automation makes people effectively jobless - and if automation touches multiple sectors of economy it multiplies the effect by squeezing out people from multiple sides, reducing the labor demand significantly. If there are no alternative sources of income(welfare, UBI) that correct this, expect many more "…

more "Neo-Luddites" to emerge; specifically in areas targeted for automation

The difference being that the automation you want to smash is actually thousands of miles away in China; there are no local factories anymore for the neo-Luddites to target.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#72

Post by projektir »

megaman22 wrote: post #68
wiz21c wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> rational when it's about people, "rational" is the last thing we need. Empathy, sympathy, compassion is what you need.

Rational is exactly what is needed. People suck, and sympathy for their suckiness and failings is the last thing that will spur meaningful progress in the crusade to make people suck less. I wish I was kidding.

That's a really high horse you're sitting on.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#73

Post by laythea »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #69
pdimitar wrote: post #51

> you do not have to let a tech company screaming “technological progress” in your face turn you into a paragon of passivity This was the article's highlight for me. As a senior programmer I found myself saying "no" to more and more tech nowadays -- smart speakers are and will always be not welcome in my house, I carefully study mobile app permissions and deny everything but the absolutely necessary minimum (on my mo…

Depending on who you are concerned about with regards to protecting your wifi, hiding your SSID will mostly only annoy legitimate users. The most basic script kiddie tools for breaking your wifi encryption will easily detect hidden SSIDs. Even Windows informs you that a hidden wifi network is available, it calls it "Other Network."

I just checked this on Windows 10. It even calls it a "Hidden Network". How entertaining! :)

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#74

Post by projektir »

shakna wrote: post #65
anoncoward111 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok, i have a better one: "rationally", i shouldn't care about global warming because it's inconvenient to alter my lifestyle and because global warming will not affect me as much in my lifetime but "empathetically" i care about the future environment i'm leaving for future humans

You're using 'rational' as something devoid from worldview - which it can't be. Rationally I should have multiple children, as my only legacy is my name. Still rational, differing worldview. Part of the worldview your thoughts on rationallity betray is that only the 'here and now' matter. Which only fits a very small philosophy even within the subset of humanity that have no belief in anything supernatural. A worldvi…

> Rationally I should have multiple children, as my only legacy is my name.

I would say that any view that includes a concept such as "legacy" is already highly irrational... there's nothing rational about having a world view that you do not call into doubt.

At the end of the day, you'll just gravitate towards a worldview that's the easiest to support. That's what tends to happen to people since cognitive dissonance hurts. There's nothing rational whatsoever in this entire process and it is the very start of the problem, you can't ignore it.

The whole problem with "rational" is that it's a poor term that got appropriated to describe behaviors that are not actually rational.

"Rational" is mostly a shorthand for "logically derived", which is only one rather shallow facet of processing, and, not all that surprisingly, can lead to rather irrational behaviors, like the ones the person you're responding to is referencing. It often leads to nihilism, amoral philosophies, and other things that play right into the worst parts of game theory. Because this is what we naturally do if we turn off other processing. We have all the other processing for a reason.

Emotions, intuition, and experience are all very important. Pure logic cannot replace them, it is simply too slow, and there's simply not enough information. The reason a lot of us are really annoyed with rationalists is because they're walking around saying all those things don't matter.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#75

Post by cheschire »

PyroLagus wrote: post #58
cheschire wrote: post #24

Try explaining to people that you’re a programmer who doesn’t own a cell phone, and count the seconds till this term gets raised. It’s disheartening to watch our society practically force others through attempted shaming to follow the acceptable path. I admit feebly that I bought a cell phone because the infotainment system in my car is garbage, and that seems to silence the worst of it, but I feel it’s going against…

Like no cell phone at all? So did you just use a landline? Or did you tell people to email you instead of calling or texting?

I prefer email for things that don't require my immediate attention. Landlines are my preference for home, but the bundling of VOIP has made POTS cost ineffective, and lazy companies are too quick to use SMS for their 2FA now that it's becoming a requirement to have one nearby regularly.

At some point I may end up just moving my data-only phone from my car to my home as part of my commute but 2FA requirements right now are still light enough I would rather suffer the inconvenience of walking back to my car to get the device I use for my radio.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#76

Post by cheschire »

ChristianBundy wrote: post #27
cheschire wrote: post #24

Try explaining to people that you’re a programmer who doesn’t own a cell phone, and count the seconds till this term gets raised. It’s disheartening to watch our society practically force others through attempted shaming to follow the acceptable path. I admit feebly that I bought a cell phone because the infotainment system in my car is garbage, and that seems to silence the worst of it, but I feel it’s going against…

Have you written about your motivations or experience without a cell phone? I've been considering getting rid of mine (and a local friend switched to a dumb phone[0]) but RMS is the first person that comes to mind when I think of a programmer without a cell phone. [0]: http://jordancrane.me/2018/04/16/the-dumbphone-chronicles/

I haven't written about it, but that's a good idea. Thanks!

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#77

Post by projektir »

roenxi wrote: post #54
anoncoward111 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because "rationally" i should kill you and take your money and food but "empathetically" i don't want the same thing to happen to me, so i tolerate your existence in hopes that you tolerate mine

There isn't a moment in recorded history where one human acting alone has outperformed a group of humans working in tandem. It just doesn't happen. You sometimes get scenarios where one human has disproportionate social control over a group, but even then experiments with democracy have shown it overwhelmingly outperforms the competition. So far on both an absolute and a per capita basis. Many (most?) of our morals a…

> Many (most?) of our morals also happen to be game-theory optimums that you would raitionally see value in even as a true sociopath.

Yet our sociopaths are all up running companies that destroy the environment. They seem to entirely gravitate towards the very behaviors the person you're replying to is afraid of (i.e., self-serving philosophies, domination and exploitation of others, etc.).

The problem is that the only scale that matters to a logic-only person is the scale of their personal life. And you can build yourself a pretty nice life while walking all over other people and not care at all that this will only survive for one generation, because then you'll be gone.

There are lots of other problems here, such as lack of the veil of ignorance. There's no mechanism to prevent the logic-focused mindset from gravitating towards castes if they think they and their children are safe from being in the bad castes.

Game-theory optimums are available to people through emotions and intuition. They're not available through logic (immediate logical processing is self-focused and therefore plays right into the worst parts of game theory: it doesn't have enough time to arrive at your thinking here). That's why people without these things tend to... uhh... have trouble adjusting, and the people who have enough mental processing to simulate and adjust tend to do pretty awful things.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#78

Post by cornholio »

benbreen wrote: post #15

Thoughtful, well-researched post. People reading this may be interested in Lord Byron's first speech to the House of Lords as well, which was a full-throated defense of the Luddites. As you might guess, it's beautifully written. It also nicely magnifies the historical irony of Byron fathering Ada Lovelace. http://www.luddites200.org.uk/LordByronspeech.html "Considerable injury has been done to the proprietors of the…

I think this fragment clearly spells out what the Luddites were back then and what they are remembered for today.

No, the Luddites where not against technology, and those using the term properly are not saying that. Luddites rebelled against workplace automation, with the explicit view that it renders skilled human labor unable to compete and has disastrous social consequences. To call someone a modern Luddite has a very specific meaning, it denotes opposition based on employment circumstances.

We aren't talking about Google Glass, mass surveillance, social credits or any ethically troubling technology that is yet to be accepted by society. We are talking about technology designed to increase productivity of regular, already accepted goods that has no nefarious effects other than unemployment, and that, during the last 300 years, increased productivity, lower prices and released humanity from industrial slavery.

The question is: can this process go on forever, aren't we hitting a hard ceiling of human adaptability where the thinking machines will make us totally unable to compete in the workplace? The Luddites matter, but not in the way the author surmises.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#79

Post by roenxi »

projektir wrote: post #74
shakna wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using 'rational' as something devoid from worldview - which it can't be. Rationally I should have multiple children, as my only legacy is my name. Still rational, differing worldview. Part of the worldview your thoughts on rationallity betray is that only the 'here and now' matter. Which only fits a very small philosophy even within the subset of humanity that have no belief in anything supernatural. A worldvi…

> Rationally I should have multiple children, as my only legacy is my name. I would say that any view that includes a concept such as "legacy" is already highly irrational... there's nothing rational about having a world view that you do not call into doubt. At the end of the day, you'll just gravitate towards a worldview that's the easiest to support. That's what tends to happen to people since cognitive dissonance…

It sounds like you've had a bad experience with rationalists. I can sympathise :P. Loudly claiming to be 'logical' and 'a rationalist' is rarely a logical or rational act, so the people who do it ironically tend not be either (the exception in my book is if they really enjoy arguing with or annoying other people).

But rationalism isn't short-termism. Rationalists can execute long term plans, potentially even multi-generational beneficial schemes, just as well as everyone else. And just as badly. As the comment you replied to succinctly argues, there is no causation between rationalism and values.

As an aside, logic isn't related to rationality any more deeply than logic is tied in to anything else. I suppose the opposite of a rationalist is a religious fundamentalist? Religious fundamentalists can be extremely logical too (as in, their actions can be completely consistent with their assumptions). Logic is just a technique to tell if some of your beliefs are inconsistent, it isn't monopolised by any given world view. And it certainly can't create new beliefs out of nothing, only evidence can do that.

Re: Why the Luddites Matter

#80

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

gaius wrote: post #70
pdimitar wrote: post #51

> you do not have to let a tech company screaming “technological progress” in your face turn you into a paragon of passivity This was the article's highlight for me. As a senior programmer I found myself saying "no" to more and more tech nowadays -- smart speakers are and will always be not welcome in my house, I carefully study mobile app permissions and deny everything but the absolutely necessary minimum (on my mo…

I am never gonna give WiFi access to my TV. Ditto. My so-called "smart" TV gets HDMI inputs and that's it. An external device connects to the Internet for Netflix etc and if that device ever displeases me or becomes truly obsolete, it can be swapped out for another. But it is extremely difficult to buy a non-smart-TV above a certain size these days. All I wanted was a high quality screen and some inputs - I don't bel…

I'm not even convinced of the usefulness of extremely large screens.

You end up having to sit progressively further away from them the bigger they are, which probably requires progressively larger rooms to put the TV in.

Post reply on HN