3 ms·

A fact check would diminish the statement as hypothetical. But the damage is already done when rabid gunslingers already ingested the idea that might makes righ

by loopz 6y ago

A fact check would diminish the statement as hypothetical. But the damage is already done when rabid gunslingers already ingested the idea that might makes right. These people are dangerous for stable democracy and fair chances for everybody.

mistermann 6y ago
Oh yes, there's no doubt about that. Bannon can say things, and who knows what person already near the edge for whatever reason might fly off the handle and do something crazy. It's more than just "a legitimate concern". But that's obvious. Seeing the risk inherent in people like Bannon doesn't even require effort. Thinking like that (and only that) is kind of the equivalent of "phoning it in" [1]. Reality is very complex. Infinity complex, some people say. Managing it skilfully is a hard problem. There is risk, and problems, everywhere. Attributing it all to cartoon evil characters like Steve Bannon and Donald Trump is pretty low effort thinking. Not even trying to be correct(!) (as opposed to "right"). My point is, why make this problem (just as one example - it is a recurring theme if one pays close attention) even harder by talking about it inaccurately &/or imprecisely? I think most of us wouldn't dare to write software at our day jobs this way, for all the obvious reasons, so then why do we accept it (or sometimes even insist upon it) when it comes to a far more complex problem, which is arguably more important than what we do from 9 to 5? I am "on the spectrum" (in case it wasn't obvious). I do not understand why people behave like this - in general, but especially programmer types, who possess logical and systems analysis capabilities far beyond what general public can even imagine. Why do people do this? Human behavior seems completely counter-intuitive to me. Like, backwards from what it should be. Can you explain it to me in some way that might make sense, to someone like me? [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=phoned%20it%20in https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=phoned%20it%...
- loopz 6y ago
  He says things he's going to do then does exactly that, without any basis in truth, facts or consequences. That's the problem. People don't believe he would be so inclined. However, there's no sign of him not meaning what he says, even when it's to troll for attention. The risk there is him going through with what he says, and not standing up for principles but rather tearing them down. Why? His agenda is simply to satisfy his own infinite craving for attention and likes. Though where are the limits to the means for attaining such a goal? They seem to diminish in time, which is pathological. Such populists play on the fears and anger of the people. There is real inequality in USA, but the masses bet on the wrong horses again and again. Why? Because the privatization of media assures that billionaires set the agenda every day. It seems high time for a third party, a middle ground, to be made. Because Democrats are too wide, too divided, and thus end up being too extreme. Ie. their stance of unlimited abortion until birth, is extremist in any country. But with the failed two party "system", they end up alienating most of the republican voter base. This is all frustration playing out due to failed two party political system and the billionaires that ensures the status quo on both sides. The problem is when people become too frustrated, but it is a hard problem who to turn to for aid.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    Does this have anything to do with what I wrote? This is what I do not understand about the culture on HN, and mainstream "right thinking" culture in general: if your ideas really are so proper and correct, then why is there so much dishonesty in your words? If your case is sound, why not just stick to facts? Why can you not reply to direct questions, but instead act as if you did not read them? Why do people do this? I mean, the text is right here on the page. Do neuro-typical people not feel embarrassment or shame, or is that kind of offset by the feeling of security that comes with being a member of the majority, a kind of "normie privilege" I guess you could say? The lack of self-awareness seems stark to me, but maybe I'm the only one that sees it.

by loopz 6y ago

mistermann 6y ago

Oh yes, there's no doubt about that. Bannon can say things, and who knows what person already near the edge for whatever reason might fly off the handle and do something crazy. It's more than just "a legitimate concern". But that's obvious. Seeing the risk inherent in people like Bannon doesn't even require effort. Thinking like that (and only that) is kind of the equivalent of "phoning it in" [1]. Reality is very complex. Infinity complex, some people say. Managing it skilfully is a hard problem. There is risk, and problems, everywhere. Attributing it all to cartoon evil characters like Steve Bannon and Donald Trump is pretty low effort thinking. Not even trying to be correct(!) (as opposed to "right"). My point is, why make this problem (just as one example - it is a recurring theme if one pays close attention) even harder by talking about it inaccurately &/or imprecisely? I think most of us wouldn't dare to write software at our day jobs this way, for all the obvious reasons, so then why do we accept it (or sometimes even insist upon it) when it comes to a far more complex problem, which is arguably more important than what we do from 9 to 5? I am "on the spectrum" (in case it wasn't obvious). I do not understand why people behave like this - in general, but especially programmer types, who possess logical and systems analysis capabilities far beyond what general public can even imagine. Why do people do this? Human behavior seems completely counter-intuitive to me. Like, backwards from what it should be. Can you explain it to me in some way that might make sense, to someone like me? [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=phoned%20it%20in https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=phoned%20it%...

loopz 6y ago
He says things he's going to do then does exactly that, without any basis in truth, facts or consequences. That's the problem. People don't believe he would be so inclined. However, there's no sign of him not meaning what he says, even when it's to troll for attention. The risk there is him going through with what he says, and not standing up for principles but rather tearing them down. Why? His agenda is simply to satisfy his own infinite craving for attention and likes. Though where are the limits to the means for attaining such a goal? They seem to diminish in time, which is pathological. Such populists play on the fears and anger of the people. There is real inequality in USA, but the masses bet on the wrong horses again and again. Why? Because the privatization of media assures that billionaires set the agenda every day. It seems high time for a third party, a middle ground, to be made. Because Democrats are too wide, too divided, and thus end up being too extreme. Ie. their stance of unlimited abortion until birth, is extremist in any country. But with the failed two party "system", they end up alienating most of the republican voter base. This is all frustration playing out due to failed two party political system and the billionaires that ensures the status quo on both sides. The problem is when people become too frustrated, but it is a hard problem who to turn to for aid.
- mistermann 6y ago
  Does this have anything to do with what I wrote? This is what I do not understand about the culture on HN, and mainstream "right thinking" culture in general: if your ideas really are so proper and correct, then why is there so much dishonesty in your words? If your case is sound, why not just stick to facts? Why can you not reply to direct questions, but instead act as if you did not read them? Why do people do this? I mean, the text is right here on the page. Do neuro-typical people not feel embarrassment or shame, or is that kind of offset by the feeling of security that comes with being a member of the majority, a kind of "normie privilege" I guess you could say? The lack of self-awareness seems stark to me, but maybe I'm the only one that sees it.