3 ms·

What is with this closed loop fascination? 100% of your time has to be devoted to benefiting humanity? I'm all for ranking certain careers and their value to so

What is with this closed loop fascination? 100% of your time has to be devoted to benefiting humanity? I'm all for ranking certain careers and their value to society, but if someone who is apart of Doctors Without Borders likes to drink shitty Pats Blue Ribbon and watch a Kardashian show at the end of a long day... so? Whatever they have to do to ready for the next day with enthusiasm, who the fuck cares? Why does their relaxing, time off endeavor have to benefit someone else? Get off your Silicon Valley, always got to hustle hamster wheel. Go watch a sunset.

RHSeeger 6y ago
> 100% of your time has to be devoted to benefiting humanity? I don't see him saying that, or even implying it. Rather, he seems to be indicating that is a valid vector by which the activity can be rated. It is not the only thing it can be rated on, nor is it even necessarily _worth_ rating it on that. But it is a thing that can be discussed.
bostonsre 6y ago
Where at all did I say you need to devote 100% of your time to humanity? Where at all did I say a person is better or worse than another based on how productive their intellectual interests are? Not sure my response deserves that much hostility. The original article is purely about whether or not eve online and similar pursuits burn intellect without any positive impact on society. I am on the nihilistic end of the tech spectrum. I made no argument that working on apps in their free time makes one better than one that spends their free time writing novels. The reality is that intellectual activities can have some meaningful benefit to humanity and some activities benefit humanity more than others. That is what the article is attempting to tease out and measure.