4 ms·

What I like about this article (despite slightly too much babbling) is a CS undergrad using lessons from Psychology and History to shape his thinking and conclu

by kodz4 7y ago

What I like about this article (despite slightly too much babbling) is a CS undergrad using lessons from Psychology and History to shape his thinking and conclusions. This was not happening 10 years back. In my experience the majority of 30 and 40 year olds in Tech today pushing AI code out have no clue who Kahneman, Hariri and Pinker are. So expect subprime meltdowns/Trump/Brexit type unintended bullshit for a few more years till the psychologist+historian+sociologist coders take over.

no_identd 7y ago
Pinker seems like a horrible example, tho: * https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/steven-pinkers-fake-enlightenment-his-book-is-full-of-misleading-claims-and-false-assertions/ https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/steven-pinkers-fake-enlight... * https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/transformation/steven-pinker-s-ideas-are-fatally-flawed-these-eight-graphs-show-why/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/transformation/steven-pinke... * https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/05/the-worlds-most-annoying-man https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/05/the-worlds-most-annoy... * http://iainmcgilchrist.com/reply-to-steven-pinker/ http://iainmcgilchrist.com/reply-to-steven-pinker/
- kodz4 7y ago
  People have found issues with Harari and Kahneman too. That's okay. But who else are you going to read to get a sense of these subjects? People attacked Faraday for suggesting electromagnetism was a thing, hardly paid attention to Maxwell for doing the Math because it was too complicated, and attacked Oliver Heaviside his whole life, for simplifying the math that everyone uses today. Each of these characters made mistakes and had weaknesses too and its easy to find fault. That's the way things work. There are always going to be more people who fixate/react to mistakes, than use them as stepping stones to new discoveries. Without these writers I would have hardly any awareness about these subjects, because these subjects were hardly discussed when I was in school. And it's not even that long ago. They opened the door. History will show that was the role they played.
- 0-_-0 7y ago
  Have you actually read those articles? Did you really find them convincing?

by kodz4 7y ago

no_identd 7y ago

Pinker seems like a horrible example, tho: * https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/steven-pinkers-fake-enlightenment-his-book-is-full-of-misleading-claims-and-false-assertions/ https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/steven-pinkers-fake-enlight... * https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/transformation/steven-pinker-s-ideas-are-fatally-flawed-these-eight-graphs-show-why/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/transformation/steven-pinke... * https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/05/the-worlds-most-annoying-man https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/05/the-worlds-most-annoy... * http://iainmcgilchrist.com/reply-to-steven-pinker/ http://iainmcgilchrist.com/reply-to-steven-pinker/

kodz4 7y ago
People have found issues with Harari and Kahneman too. That's okay. But who else are you going to read to get a sense of these subjects? People attacked Faraday for suggesting electromagnetism was a thing, hardly paid attention to Maxwell for doing the Math because it was too complicated, and attacked Oliver Heaviside his whole life, for simplifying the math that everyone uses today. Each of these characters made mistakes and had weaknesses too and its easy to find fault. That's the way things work. There are always going to be more people who fixate/react to mistakes, than use them as stepping stones to new discoveries. Without these writers I would have hardly any awareness about these subjects, because these subjects were hardly discussed when I was in school. And it's not even that long ago. They opened the door. History will show that was the role they played.
0-_-0 7y ago
Have you actually read those articles? Did you really find them convincing?