3 ms·

Most people do behave "decently" in this sense. However some do not. Under an open system, these outliers will eventually eat the decent. It strikes me this is

Most people do behave "decently" in this sense. However some do not. Under an open system, these outliers will eventually eat the decent. It strikes me this is likely the exact journey we have come on to arrive where we are. We have created a structure in which the monsters can eat a certain proportion of us in order that we may not be eaten.

JackFr 6y ago
> Most people do behave "decently" in this sense. It’s even worse than that. Most people believe that they act decently. But to paraphrase Feynman, the easiest person to deceive is ourselves. No one (or at least vanishingly few) believe that they are the villain in their own narrative. And yet evil persists in the world.
- luckylion 6y ago
  I'm not sure that is true. While I don't know (or rather, I don't know that I know) anyone who's actually a villain of some sort, I know quite a few people in SEO affiliate marketing. Their businesses generally don't add any value, they buy links, use cheap copy writers that produce mediocre content often full of factual errors, Google eats it up like it was the best thing ever (because of the links they bought), people get directed to their sites from search queries and buy at the shops the recommend. They essentially inject themselves between Google and the shop, but they're not adding any value - if anything, they're reducing value (by influencing buying decision with lies - not just marketing "women will find you more attractive if you have this car", actual lies as in "this product can do X" when it can't). And they know it, and when you ask them about it, they'll happily say so. They don't believe that they are providing a service, and they're not telling that to themselves either. Why do they do it, then? Because they get money for it. They are well aware that they aren't adding value, but they're doing it because it pays. I don't believe that e.g. a thief, thugs or fraudster go around thinking they do nothing wrong or that they act decently. They know, they are fully aware that they are a net-negative to society. What I find more interesting in that regard is this: do they realize they are abnormal in that regard, or do they believe that everybody acts like them?
  - JackFr 6y ago
    I think people rationalize. Stealing from faceless corporations who treat customers poorly is OK. Stealing from people who are “too rich”. People who “need to be taught a lesson.” People who create a narrative of their own victimhood. I would say about the SEO affiliate marketers, that they would tell you that they’re no different than other marketers, they just operate in a specialized space.
IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
this the most intolerant wins : https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  That article doesn't actually support your argument. The dictatorship of the small minority is a case of simple accommodation, some people want things much more strongly than others and those things are not very costly to the majority, so they get universally accepted to reduce friction. It doesn't mean that intolerance wins, just that democratic societies are accommodating of minor but strongly desired things for certain groups.

JackFr 6y ago

> Most people do behave "decently" in this sense. It’s even worse than that. Most people believe that they act decently. But to paraphrase Feynman, the easiest person to deceive is ourselves. No one (or at least vanishingly few) believe that they are the villain in their own narrative. And yet evil persists in the world.

luckylion 6y ago
I'm not sure that is true. While I don't know (or rather, I don't know that I know) anyone who's actually a villain of some sort, I know quite a few people in SEO affiliate marketing. Their businesses generally don't add any value, they buy links, use cheap copy writers that produce mediocre content often full of factual errors, Google eats it up like it was the best thing ever (because of the links they bought), people get directed to their sites from search queries and buy at the shops the recommend. They essentially inject themselves between Google and the shop, but they're not adding any value - if anything, they're reducing value (by influencing buying decision with lies - not just marketing "women will find you more attractive if you have this car", actual lies as in "this product can do X" when it can't). And they know it, and when you ask them about it, they'll happily say so. They don't believe that they are providing a service, and they're not telling that to themselves either. Why do they do it, then? Because they get money for it. They are well aware that they aren't adding value, but they're doing it because it pays. I don't believe that e.g. a thief, thugs or fraudster go around thinking they do nothing wrong or that they act decently. They know, they are fully aware that they are a net-negative to society. What I find more interesting in that regard is this: do they realize they are abnormal in that regard, or do they believe that everybody acts like them?
- JackFr 6y ago
  I think people rationalize. Stealing from faceless corporations who treat customers poorly is OK. Stealing from people who are “too rich”. People who “need to be taught a lesson.” People who create a narrative of their own victimhood. I would say about the SEO affiliate marketers, that they would tell you that they’re no different than other marketers, they just operate in a specialized space.

IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago

this the most intolerant wins : https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

sudosysgen 6y ago
That article doesn't actually support your argument. The dictatorship of the small minority is a case of simple accommodation, some people want things much more strongly than others and those things are not very costly to the majority, so they get universally accepted to reduce friction. It doesn't mean that intolerance wins, just that democratic societies are accommodating of minor but strongly desired things for certain groups.