5 ms·

I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, Cory is probably mostly right on the specifics. On the other, Andreeson's article was so vapid and ignorant it's b

I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, Cory is probably mostly right on the specifics. On the other, Andreeson's article was so vapid and ignorant it's barely worth addressing. We only talk about it because the guy's a US ubermensch (a nation & class rapidly losing significance, to everyone's benefit). Yet here I am commenting too I suppose.

ianai 6y ago
Not properly refuting bad ideas let’s the bad idea spread.
- croon 6y ago
  First off, I agree. But it's not practically feasible. You can autogenerate bullshit, or manually do it with complete disregard for sourcing or legitimacy, but you can do neither for refutations. I don't have a solution for this, but the old adage "truth prevails" is looking more and more dead.
- crispinb 6y ago
  We seem to live in an age where comprehensively refuted ideas readily gain adherents (not that I have an Age of Reason in mind to be particularly nostalgic about). There can be a fine line between useful refutation and promotion. A hard one to draw, I would accept.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- GoodJokes 6y ago
  It is not clear if properly refuting really does anything anymore. The release of the info in the first is the ball game. It was popularized on Hackernews and is now part of the guardrails of debate. Marc wins. We have a huge manufacturing consent problem.
atmosx 6y ago
Indeed it is so ignorant that I was amazed by the amount of upvotes the article received on HN.
- ianai 6y ago
  Horrified and shocked. I’m deeply grateful for the technical discussions on HN. Which makes it all the harder to see such shortsighted views promulgated here.
- M2Ys4U 6y ago
  Hacker News is - in large part - a promotional activity of a set of venture capitalists. Naturally it attracts people (although not _only_ people) who want to suck up to venture capitalists, or who share the same hyper-capitalist mindset.
  - crispinb 6y ago
    ... roughly equivalent to people who can use words like 'hypergrowth' with a straight face.
    - SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
      If you haven't seen it, the HN summary/parody site n-gate[0] is excellent. [0] http://n-gate.com/ http://n-gate.com/
      - crispinb 6y ago
        I hadn't. Thanks, that's a little gem.
- GoodJokes 6y ago
  Stop overestimating hackernews posters. Lots of grifters and way too confident people.
handedness 6y ago
> a nation...rapidly losing significance, to everyone's benefit If I may offer a prediction, and one totally meant in a spirit of friendship: that comment will not age well.
- crispinb 6y ago
  Well I've read enough over the years (Philip Tetlock springs to mind) to rarely be any more confident of my own predictions in the political sphere than anyone else's. Only time will tell! As for the spirit of friendship, and just to be clear, I believe the US's declining significance, although having some distinctly ignoble proximate causes, will ultimately be of benefit to her own citizens also. I really meant 'everyone'.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
karyon 6y ago
Can someone expand on this? I found the article interesting, energetic and containing a strong and, to me, positive and useful message ("ask yourself what are you building?"). Yet parent calls it ignorant, of what? a sibling comment is "horrified" that the article gained so much attention here, although it seems to me that with it's focus on building stuff it's 100% on topic (which is "Anything that good hackers would find interesting"). As it's a little unsettling to me that other people find it horrifying that people like me found the article interesting, any details would be appreciated.
- PascLeRasc 6y ago
  Marc's article was calling for things like building delivery drones and automating vaccines, which would be fantastic, but we're not living in a world where that's feasible right now. It was interesting, I agree, but as this response points out, there's more pressing matters right now like homelessness and internet access.
- lazyasciiart 6y ago
  Have you read the article that you are commenting on? Because the very first paragraph starts explaining things that Andreeson appears to be ignorant of.
  - karyon 6y ago
    Yes, I have. "Every Western institution" is obviously an hyperbole, I wouldn't consider that ignorant. I started skimming the reply-article at some point, as it seemed to me like most nitpicks the author had might be correct, but missed the point of the original article. Reminding me of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854475 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854475. (OT: 'Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." ', from the HN guidelines)
    - lazyasciiart 6y ago
      OT: perhaps that guideline should be updated to say that when asking a question that appears to be entirely covered by the article under discussion, commenters should clarify that they have read and it, and explain why the article does not sufficiently answer the question. As it is, it's just a suggestion to be more passive aggressive - those two examples convey exactly the same thing except in the second one, you pretend that you are not accusing the commenter of not reading it. For example here, my response could have been "The very first paragraph says that." Would you have interpreted that differently in any way?

ianai 6y ago

Not properly refuting bad ideas let’s the bad idea spread.

croon 6y ago
First off, I agree. But it's not practically feasible. You can autogenerate bullshit, or manually do it with complete disregard for sourcing or legitimacy, but you can do neither for refutations. I don't have a solution for this, but the old adage "truth prevails" is looking more and more dead.
crispinb 6y ago
We seem to live in an age where comprehensively refuted ideas readily gain adherents (not that I have an Age of Reason in mind to be particularly nostalgic about). There can be a fine line between useful refutation and promotion. A hard one to draw, I would accept.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
GoodJokes 6y ago
It is not clear if properly refuting really does anything anymore. The release of the info in the first is the ball game. It was popularized on Hackernews and is now part of the guardrails of debate. Marc wins. We have a huge manufacturing consent problem.

atmosx 6y ago

Indeed it is so ignorant that I was amazed by the amount of upvotes the article received on HN.

ianai 6y ago
Horrified and shocked. I’m deeply grateful for the technical discussions on HN. Which makes it all the harder to see such shortsighted views promulgated here.
M2Ys4U 6y ago
Hacker News is - in large part - a promotional activity of a set of venture capitalists. Naturally it attracts people (although not _only_ people) who want to suck up to venture capitalists, or who share the same hyper-capitalist mindset.
- crispinb 6y ago
  ... roughly equivalent to people who can use words like 'hypergrowth' with a straight face.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
    If you haven't seen it, the HN summary/parody site n-gate[0] is excellent. [0] http://n-gate.com/ http://n-gate.com/
    - crispinb 6y ago
      I hadn't. Thanks, that's a little gem.
GoodJokes 6y ago
Stop overestimating hackernews posters. Lots of grifters and way too confident people.

handedness 6y ago

> a nation...rapidly losing significance, to everyone's benefit If I may offer a prediction, and one totally meant in a spirit of friendship: that comment will not age well.

crispinb 6y ago
Well I've read enough over the years (Philip Tetlock springs to mind) to rarely be any more confident of my own predictions in the political sphere than anyone else's. Only time will tell! As for the spirit of friendship, and just to be clear, I believe the US's declining significance, although having some distinctly ignoble proximate causes, will ultimately be of benefit to her own citizens also. I really meant 'everyone'.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

karyon 6y ago

Can someone expand on this? I found the article interesting, energetic and containing a strong and, to me, positive and useful message ("ask yourself what are you building?"). Yet parent calls it ignorant, of what? a sibling comment is "horrified" that the article gained so much attention here, although it seems to me that with it's focus on building stuff it's 100% on topic (which is "Anything that good hackers would find interesting"). As it's a little unsettling to me that other people find it horrifying that people like me found the article interesting, any details would be appreciated.

PascLeRasc 6y ago
Marc's article was calling for things like building delivery drones and automating vaccines, which would be fantastic, but we're not living in a world where that's feasible right now. It was interesting, I agree, but as this response points out, there's more pressing matters right now like homelessness and internet access.
lazyasciiart 6y ago
Have you read the article that you are commenting on? Because the very first paragraph starts explaining things that Andreeson appears to be ignorant of.
- karyon 6y ago
  Yes, I have. "Every Western institution" is obviously an hyperbole, I wouldn't consider that ignorant. I started skimming the reply-article at some point, as it seemed to me like most nitpicks the author had might be correct, but missed the point of the original article. Reminding me of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854475 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854475. (OT: 'Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." ', from the HN guidelines)
  - lazyasciiart 6y ago
    OT: perhaps that guideline should be updated to say that when asking a question that appears to be entirely covered by the article under discussion, commenters should clarify that they have read and it, and explain why the article does not sufficiently answer the question. As it is, it's just a suggestion to be more passive aggressive - those two examples convey exactly the same thing except in the second one, you pretend that you are not accusing the commenter of not reading it. For example here, my response could have been "The very first paragraph says that." Would you have interpreted that differently in any way?