3 ms·
That's a valid point. But is pursuing art (or whatsver) admitting to yourself that you value art more than world hunger? After all, that's how you're allocatin
by Sam_Odio 15y ago
That's a valid point. But is pursuing art (or whatsver) admitting to yourself that you value art more than world hunger? After all, that's how you're allocating your resources.
Fwiw, anyone who knows me know I don't have a holier-than-thou attitude (though I took one for this post). This was mostly meant as an edgy/controversial twist to the social experiment: how do peoople react when someone takes the money (which is a public good) and imposes their own morals on it (even if it's for good)?
- nowarninglabel 15y agoI don't know you, but you come off as quite pretentious. I work for a charity/non-profit but that doesn't prevent me from seeing the value in a shared good experiment. Asides from the myriad of other issues in your post, the most important one is that you completely ignore the fact that many people may donate quite a bit to charity, but also may wish to involve themselves in a thing like Jonathan's card. The two are not mutually exclusive, and deriving value from the latter may encourage someone to do more of the former. It looks like you were too short-sighted to actually think any of this through though in your attempt to make a selfish point.
- catch23 15y agoAnd you come off as a person with a holier-than-thou attitude. What's wrong with thinking about an experiment that hacks the original experiment? I thought this was Hacker News.
- burgerbrain 15y agoThere is nothing wrong with thinking about an experiment that hacks the original experiment. There is however something wrong with the statement "is pursuing art (or whatsver) admitting to yourself that you value art more than world hunger? After all, that's how you're allocating your resources." That something is that it is pretentious as fuck.
- Karhan 15y agoshort-sighted is the perfect word here. Its possible that without his deliberate abuse this small project would have encouraged people to be more charitable to causes like the one he wants to donate to. The value of those donations over a lifetime could well have exceeded his little cash grab several times. Instead this has just made people distrust the idea of giving money away a little bit more.
- Karhan 15y agoshort-sighted is the perfect word here. Its possible that without his deliberate abuse this small project would have encouraged people to be more charitable to causes like the one he wants to donate to. The value of those donations over a lifetime could well have exceeded his little cash grab several times. Instead this has just made people distrust the idea of giving money away a little bit more.
- djchung 15y agoFwiw, I do know Sam and can vouch that he is not pretentious or has a holier than thou attitude. How would participating in Jonathan's card encourage donating to charity? Adding more money to Jonathan's card is not charity. One could even argue that if you knew Sam was doing this, adding money to Jonathan's card so that Sam would donate the money is charity.
- sequoia 15y agoDo you consider Hacker News threads more important that working to end world hunger? ;)
- kennywinker 15y agoWether or not I consciously consider it the case, at this time my actions betray my true belief.
- zacharycohn 15y ago> "how do people react when someone takes the money (which is a public good) and imposes their own morals on it (even if it's for good)?" Not well?
- kwis 15y agoYou know nothing about the people you judged except that they threw a coffee into a virtual 'give a coffee / take a coffee' tray. And from that, you've extrapolated that they care more about art than world hunger. That's as illogical as it is self-righteous.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]