4 ms·

tech people aren't immune to the hyper divisiveness taking place around the world. Once "your team" decides it no longer wants to respect freedom of the press

tech people aren't immune to the hyper divisiveness taking place around the world. Once "your team" decides it no longer wants to respect freedom of the press or election results then you must follow suit. Gotta make sure your team wins, right?

austincheney 6y ago
Some people don’t play on a team.
- centimeter 6y ago
  Then you're probably following a losing strategy. "Team" doesn't have to mean "generic normie political party"; there are other team dynamics at play. In any case, if you haven't partitioned the political space into allies and enemies along at least a few planes, you're probably going to get taken advantage of (at the very least).
  - austincheney 6y ago
    I am fine with being an individual with original opinions but I can empathize with insecure people who band together for reassurance.
    - centimeter 6y ago
      If you're not attuned enough to figure out why political alliances are worthwhile, your opinions probably aren't that original. It's not a matter of "reassurance" - it's about economies of scale. If the best explanation you can come up with for why a bunch of people exhibit a behavior you don't is "they have a personality flaw", this is very strong evidence that you don't actually have a good grasp of people's motivations.
      - austincheney 6y ago
        Strength in numbers is a compensation for insecurity. > If the best explanation you can come up with for why a bunch of people exhibit a behavior you don't is "they have a personality flaw" Conformity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformity
        centimeter 6y ago
        Why do you think people who are undoubtedly smarter and more original than you are also buy into political "teams"? If "conformity" is your best answer, then once again, this demonstrates you don't really grasp what's going on.
        austincheney 6y ago
        Read the Wikipedia link. It answers your question.
        centimeter 6y ago
        This is not meant as an insult to you, but just as a warning that you should keep this in mind when you’re analyzing your own decision making; you are pretty clearly neither smart nor original. It’s very unlikely you are actually ever going to have any valuable original thoughts, at least in the way you seem to think you do. I’m sure you’ll appreciate this since your profile is all about “radical honestly”. Taking Dalio seriously is another sign of a hopeless midwit with an inflated sense of intelligence.
        austincheney 6y ago
        > It’s very unlikely you are actually ever... Proven through product creation and job performance.
        webmaven 6y ago
        > Strength in numbers is a compensation for insecurity. "strength in numbers". ≠ "economies of scale" The former is about relative group size, mutual defense within the group, and reducing the risks of aggression against outgroups. The latter is about increasing the effectiveness of coordinated activity more generally (which, yes, can include defense and aggression), especially those activities that persuade people. Winning hearts and changing minds about issues, especially across faction/party lines. Making common cause with others who mostly share your views, even if the issues you most care about aren't the same ones, is just good tactics. Making common cause with those you mostly DISAGREE with on the issues that you DO agree on is good STRATEGY.
      - UnFleshedOne 6y ago
        It is one thing to build political alliances for practical reasons (a necessity if you want to achieve anything), it is entirely another thing to take on every and all opinions of your alliance regardless of their merit. That's a personality flaw that everybody has to one degree or another.
- lallysingh 6y ago
  That's another team.
  - bobthebuilders 6y ago
    > Some people don’t play on a team.
  - echelon 6y ago
    That's not a team! I'll work with anyone (within reason) to build a better tomorrow.
  - usefulcat 6y ago
    "We're all individuals!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ
    - webmaven 6y ago
      "I'm not."
- wnevets 6y ago
  Some people like to think they don't belong to a team. They're usually part of the enlightened centerist both sides are bad team.
  - dagav 6y ago
    That's just what people who belong to a team think. It's actually possible to think for yourself
    - wnevets 6y ago
      everyone loves to believe they think for their self, especially those who belong to teams and it is everyone else who are sheep(le).
      - dagav 6y ago
        Well if you question your beliefs then you can arrive at your first principles, and then you can start questioning things people tell you by ensuring that you understand them as derived from your first principles. That's called thinking for yourself and one benefit of doing so is that when other people tell me I'm not thinking for myself, I know that they're wrong because I know that I have direct access to the truth. People who don't think for themselves rely on others for access to the truth.
- PeterisP 6y ago
  Sure, some don't, but most do (at least unconsciously), that's just how people behave. Some people consciously try to avoid "playing on a team" with various degrees of success, but it's a bit unnatural and actually quite hard to do.
  - austincheney 6y ago
    I agree. Originality is a rare and measurable personality index.

austincheney 6y ago

Some people don’t play on a team.

centimeter 6y ago
Then you're probably following a losing strategy. "Team" doesn't have to mean "generic normie political party"; there are other team dynamics at play. In any case, if you haven't partitioned the political space into allies and enemies along at least a few planes, you're probably going to get taken advantage of (at the very least).
- austincheney 6y ago
  I am fine with being an individual with original opinions but I can empathize with insecure people who band together for reassurance.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    If you're not attuned enough to figure out why political alliances are worthwhile, your opinions probably aren't that original. It's not a matter of "reassurance" - it's about economies of scale. If the best explanation you can come up with for why a bunch of people exhibit a behavior you don't is "they have a personality flaw", this is very strong evidence that you don't actually have a good grasp of people's motivations.
    - austincheney 6y ago
      Strength in numbers is a compensation for insecurity. > If the best explanation you can come up with for why a bunch of people exhibit a behavior you don't is "they have a personality flaw" Conformity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformity
      - centimeter 6y ago
        Why do you think people who are undoubtedly smarter and more original than you are also buy into political "teams"? If "conformity" is your best answer, then once again, this demonstrates you don't really grasp what's going on.
        austincheney 6y ago
        Read the Wikipedia link. It answers your question.
        centimeter 6y ago
        This is not meant as an insult to you, but just as a warning that you should keep this in mind when you’re analyzing your own decision making; you are pretty clearly neither smart nor original. It’s very unlikely you are actually ever going to have any valuable original thoughts, at least in the way you seem to think you do. I’m sure you’ll appreciate this since your profile is all about “radical honestly”. Taking Dalio seriously is another sign of a hopeless midwit with an inflated sense of intelligence.
        austincheney 6y ago
        > It’s very unlikely you are actually ever... Proven through product creation and job performance.
      - webmaven 6y ago
        > Strength in numbers is a compensation for insecurity. "strength in numbers". ≠ "economies of scale" The former is about relative group size, mutual defense within the group, and reducing the risks of aggression against outgroups. The latter is about increasing the effectiveness of coordinated activity more generally (which, yes, can include defense and aggression), especially those activities that persuade people. Winning hearts and changing minds about issues, especially across faction/party lines. Making common cause with others who mostly share your views, even if the issues you most care about aren't the same ones, is just good tactics. Making common cause with those you mostly DISAGREE with on the issues that you DO agree on is good STRATEGY.
    - UnFleshedOne 6y ago
      It is one thing to build political alliances for practical reasons (a necessity if you want to achieve anything), it is entirely another thing to take on every and all opinions of your alliance regardless of their merit. That's a personality flaw that everybody has to one degree or another.
lallysingh 6y ago
That's another team.
- bobthebuilders 6y ago
  > Some people don’t play on a team.
- echelon 6y ago
  That's not a team! I'll work with anyone (within reason) to build a better tomorrow.
- usefulcat 6y ago
  "We're all individuals!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ
  - webmaven 6y ago
    "I'm not."
wnevets 6y ago
Some people like to think they don't belong to a team. They're usually part of the enlightened centerist both sides are bad team.
- dagav 6y ago
  That's just what people who belong to a team think. It's actually possible to think for yourself
  - wnevets 6y ago
    everyone loves to believe they think for their self, especially those who belong to teams and it is everyone else who are sheep(le).
    - dagav 6y ago
      Well if you question your beliefs then you can arrive at your first principles, and then you can start questioning things people tell you by ensuring that you understand them as derived from your first principles. That's called thinking for yourself and one benefit of doing so is that when other people tell me I'm not thinking for myself, I know that they're wrong because I know that I have direct access to the truth. People who don't think for themselves rely on others for access to the truth.
PeterisP 6y ago
Sure, some don't, but most do (at least unconsciously), that's just how people behave. Some people consciously try to avoid "playing on a team" with various degrees of success, but it's a bit unnatural and actually quite hard to do.
- austincheney 6y ago
  I agree. Originality is a rare and measurable personality index.