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

We are all animals at night

hazlitt.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 295 posts

Re: We are all animals at night

#81

Post by FooBarBizBazz »

Let's get this straight. The person blessed with what is basically a panhandling superpower -- an attractive female body -- somehow says her marks, the ones paying $80, have an entitled attitude toward sexual attention. Pause and think about that. Do you think these guys had a Plan B to buy them an English degree?

These places conduct zero-sum economic activity. One person loses money, one person gains money, and nothing of value is created. Draw a control volume around an economic activity to understand it. China: Opium in, silver out. Congo: Guns in, rubber out. This place: Money in, nothing out.

A hallmark of exploiters is that they have contempt for their marks. Well, I sense more than a little contempt here. Don't trust this person around children or small animals.

Of course she justifies herself eloquently; did you not just see what she spent the money on? An English degree.

Moreover, she admits that she understands what she was doing:

> my livelihood somehow still depended on men employing bad judgement.

So don't get distracted. Draw a control volume. And stay away from these places, and these people.

Most people here commenting, even those praising this writing, who will surely rush to defend her, must at some level clearly understand this. Like -- do you frequent prostitutes? ... Didn't think so. So you know I'm right.

Re: We are all animals at night

#82

Post by froggertoaster »

FooBarBizBazz wrote: post #81

Let's get this straight. The person blessed with what is basically a panhandling superpower -- an attractive female body -- somehow says her marks , the ones paying $80, have an entitled attitude toward sexual attention. Pause and think about that. Do you think these guys had a Plan B to buy them an English degree? These places conduct zero-sum economic activity. One person loses money, one person gains money, and no…

Agreed, and I think your points will be missed amongst the cacophony of praise for the admittedly-entertaining article. Reminds you that you can dress anything up and people will accept it if it's eloquent and entertaining enough.

Re: We are all animals at night

#83

Post by MichaelZuo »

kdmccormick wrote: post #80
Exoristos wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dues it surprise you that there are people on HN who have gone without food or proper shelter?

Not at all! It would surprise me if someone had gone without food and shelter and then insisted that self-actualization was more important to them when they were cold and hungry.

1 in a million outliers do exist, some folks are even literally wired differently.

Re: We are all animals at night

#84

Post by truculent »

whimsicalism wrote: post #55

Beautifully written, even if I don’t necessarily agree with every single point made. Especially towards the end, I feel that she tries to emphasize the nobility and radical nature of this work, taking umbrage at Eric Adam’s use of the word “low-skill” to describe some of these sorts of jobs. But it seems somewhat belied by the fact that, afaict, as soon as she had the means to escape, she did. And the romanticization…

> Especially towards the end, I feel that she tries to emphasize the nobility and radical nature of this work, taking umbrage at Eric Adam’s use of the word “low-skill” to describe some of these sorts of jobs. But it seems somewhat belied by the fact that, afaict, as soon as she had the means to escape, she did.

Just because something is skilful doesn’t make it enjoyable or rewarding. Not to mention a person’s health and safety (both economic and physical) being considered.

Re: We are all animals at night

#85

Post by xcxcx »

whimsicalism wrote: post #74
xcxcx wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you keep referring to an original comment, I unfortunately must ask which comment you're talking about

> Since you keep referring to an original comment This is my first mention of an original comment, but I was referring to this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37026511

Gotcha. I didn't post that comment.

In fact, your comparison about walking and chewing gum vs people's attention makes zero sense. Attention is finite and mutually exclusive, you can only look at one thing at once

Re: We are all animals at night

#87

Post by selestify »

throwanem wrote: post #69

> I felt little of the camaraderie I once did while working night shifts. I’m unsure why I felt this dissonance, and it occurs to me now that it could have been more self-imposed than anything. I doubt it. I've worked days and nights at different times in the same place, at a couple of jobs in different parts of the country. There's a real difference between what people are like in the daytime and nighttime worlds, a…

What do you think causes this difference?

Re: We are all animals at night

#88

Post by [deleted] »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #83
kdmccormick wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all! It would surprise me if someone had gone without food and shelter and then insisted that self-actualization was more important to them when they were cold and hungry.

1 in a million outliers do exist, some folks are even literally wired differently.

[deleted]

Re: We are all animals at night

#89

Post by xcxcx »

froggertoaster wrote: post #82
FooBarBizBazz wrote: post #81

Let's get this straight. The person blessed with what is basically a panhandling superpower -- an attractive female body -- somehow says her marks , the ones paying $80, have an entitled attitude toward sexual attention. Pause and think about that. Do you think these guys had a Plan B to buy them an English degree? These places conduct zero-sum economic activity. One person loses money, one person gains money, and no…

Agreed, and I think your points will be missed amongst the cacophony of praise for the admittedly-entertaining article. Reminds you that you can dress anything up and people will accept it if it's eloquent and entertaining enough.

And as long as it toes the line

Re: We are all animals at night

#90

Post by belorn »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #26

This is why I imagine sex robots will only be a good thing. The humanitarian promise of AGI is it serves human needs optimally and frees humans from the need to stoop to the lowest levels to serve them.

The general impression I get from the article (and similar reports) is that patrons of sex workers in general do not seek the mechanical aspects of sex. They also do not seek power. What the largest majority seek is validation.

The big breakthrough would be robots that provided the emotional need of human connection and validation. If the mind could be tricked into a similar state as being in the center of a strong social network, then not only would that serve human needs optimally it would also be the single biggest health boost given.

Post reply on HN