6 ms·

This article, for its length, ended up saying absolutely nothing

• 7532yahoogmail 7y ago
  Disagree
  • gullyfur 7y ago
    > Disagree What did it say?
    • ForHackernews 7y ago
      The thesis of the piece is captured in this passage: > The pull of the past is strong. The mental frameworks through which we understand the world are durable, far more so than its actual fabric. The new falls into the old, square pegs into round holes no matter how poor the fit, simply because the round holes are what we have available. The point is that you may not notice your empire is dying all around you because it happens gradually and your mental framework for thinking about the world is less dynamic than the world itself. (Consider: how many tech people still think in terms of the 'open web' in contrast to walled gardens, when the web today is basically one browser engine accessing one or two CDNs fronting one of three cloud hosting providers) The rest of the article is supporting evidence, using the historical example of Rome and drawing parallels with the United States.
      • imtringued 7y ago
        Your 'open web' analogy is just plain wrong.
        • krageon 7y ago
          It would help if you could substantiate what you are trying to say, particularly if that substantiation was somehow building on to the foundation that the post you respond to has laid.
        • majewsky 7y ago
          By disagreeing with grandparent without making an actual argument, you're doing more to prove them than to disprove them.