TED and inequality: The real story • Hacker News Board

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#81

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:26 PM UTC

daenz wrote: post #26

And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. I read that as "it is controversial, so we don't want to talk about that." If some new science showed that human consciousness begins at X days after conception, would that not be aired because it is a hot-button topic too?

If there was enough evidence, I guess it would. What differs TED from "elsewhere in the media" is that the former has content, the latter usually not so much.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#82

Post by fleitz » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:29 PM UTC

roguecoder wrote: post #34

dkhenry wrote: post #11

Its amazing what a little truth sheds on an otherwise perfect angry mob. After hearing from both sides I hope those who accused TED of censorship will be kind enough to apologise.

"Censorship" is the wrong word, but I'll stand by my accusations of cowardliness. If what he said was an irrelevant ad hominem attack (like "Republicans smell and are ugly") I'd understand their reluctance, but it was an accurate description of the actions of a political party. By ruling such topics off limits, they are intellectually hobbling the discussions that can be had. We can not address the problems they are…

Not getting into arguments with children about whether the easter bunny or santa claus are real doesn't make a person a coward it makes them intelligent. If they want to believe in those things then it's fine, I don't need to explain to them the irrationality of it, and often times it's just more fun to go along with it.

You try explaining to a group of children on Christmas morning that Santa isn't real and there aren't going to be any presents this year.

If instead you tell the children you will put in a good word for them with Santa Claus and then Santa Claus brings them the stuff they wanted then they'll be amazed by your pull with Santa.

Think of it this way, every week 2 billion people give up 10% of their wages just so Santa's intercessors can give them a little wine and some rice paper.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#83

Post by tomjen3 » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

daenz wrote: post #26

And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. I read that as "it is controversial, so we don't want to talk about that." If some new science showed that human consciousness begins at X days after conception, would that not be aired because it is a hot-button topic too?

Why should he post a talk about that? You could get that information from any other source.

Whereas TED is the only place I can find a talk about taking criminals bicycling, the importance of the washing machine and why we should eat insects (that one does have a few doses of liberal morality though).

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#84

Post by nazgulnarsil » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

thaumaturgy wrote: post #75

I watched the video after reading TED's response, and I'm skeptical of some of their claims, but I can also see why they didn't initially choose to publish it on their site. The video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI Since it's short, I'll go over it point-by-point. 1. "It is astounding how significantly one idea can shape a society and its policies. Consider this one: if taxes on the rich go up, job…

some of us are fine talking about "the elephant in the room" for supply-side econ as you put it.

Here's the thing, you can't force people to be productive enough to be able to consume at the optimal level. All you can do is provide an environment where being productive is easier.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#85

Post by daenz » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #83

daenz wrote: post #26

And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. I read that as "it is controversial, so we don't want to talk about that." If some new science showed that human consciousness begins at X days after conception, would that not be aired because it is a hot-button topic too?

Why should he post a talk about that? You could get that information from any other source. Whereas TED is the only place I can find a talk about taking criminals bicycling, the importance of the washing machine and why we should eat insects (that one does have a few doses of liberal morality though).

The TED audience seemed to like it and think it's appropriate. Watch it to the end, half of the audience gives a standing ovation. I've seen front page TED talks that don't get standing ovations.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#86

Post by smsm42 » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:33 PM UTC

pauljonas wrote: post #35

scott_s wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between being controversial and being partisan. The talk directly calls out Republicans. Based on what Chris Anderson said, they would welcome a talk on that controversial subject, but it couldn't call out political parties.

But that is the problem, in a nutshell. We don't want to "call out political parties", so we will ignore the truth that one of the political parties has deviated so far off course, in its anti-science, anti-intellectual, anti-equality pursuit. But let us not speak of it.

ITYM "my opinion is that". When you confuse your opinion with "the truth", that's where the problem starts. And when you are so far off course that you dismiss everybody disagreeing as anti-pretty-much-everything good, pure evil they are - you might not notice that there's something wrong about it, but other people would. Not all people are suffering from partisan blindness. Some can see that on many points are many valid opinions, and while one opinion can win in the eyes of the majority over the other and define what the priorities of the policy are - that is very far from totally denying the party that disagreeing with you any shred of possibility of having real argument.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#87

Post by Gormo » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:34 PM UTC

daenz wrote: post #26

And we try to steer clear of talks that are bound to descend into the same dismal partisan head-butting people can find every day elsewhere in the media. I read that as "it is controversial, so we don't want to talk about that." If some new science showed that human consciousness begins at X days after conception, would that not be aired because it is a hot-button topic too?

Science is science, and can be discussed without descending into a political debate. Discussions about 'inequality' are entirely political, and have little value outside of polemic.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#88

Post by steve8918 » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:34 PM UTC

First and foremost, from the video that was posted, the talk in question was not good at all. As a speaker, Nick Hanauer is not very polished and has this halting manner of speaking that is fairly irritating. It sounds like a speech that a high school student would make.

This was too easy of a decision to not run this, because it was really terrible. Instead of bitching and moaning about censorship, get a better speaker to talk about income equality. Get a more dynamic speaker to present a better-researched and better written speech, and then see what happens. But THIS particular speech is not something that people should be rallying behind, because it's really bad.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#89

Post by rosser » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:34 PM UTC

pauljonas wrote: post #35

scott_s wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between being controversial and being partisan. The talk directly calls out Republicans. Based on what Chris Anderson said, they would welcome a talk on that controversial subject, but it couldn't call out political parties.

But that is the problem, in a nutshell. We don't want to "call out political parties", so we will ignore the truth that one of the political parties has deviated so far off course, in its anti-science, anti-intellectual, anti-equality pursuit. But let us not speak of it.

Anybody who actually thinks about issues in terms of the entrenched, incumbent parties in the US political system is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Virtually everything that's broken in America today is in some fashion a consequence of the bi-polar stranglehold on power the country has been subject to, more or less since its founding.

Re: TED and inequality: The real story

#90

Post by wavephorm » Thu, May 17, 2012, 9:40 PM UTC

This sounds like the typical hogwash from any other politically aligned media outlet. Am I reading a Fox News editorial? Just post the video and let "the internet" make the decision. If you think you think you can censor opinion in the modern world then you are flat-out wrong.