3 ms·

I believe pretty strongly in some of Taleb's theories. That some people are antifragile, they gain from chaos, and that the people in the strongest positions ar

I believe pretty strongly in some of Taleb's theories. That some people are antifragile, they gain from chaos, and that the people in the strongest positions are the ones who do so. What I don't agree with is the idea of structuring society to benefit antifragile people and encourage more to become such. Indiscriminate sabotage is a type of chaos. I expect it to always benefit those who are already in the strongest positions, and harm those in the weakest positions. If one is going to do hacktivism, I'm sure they can think of something better than just randomly attacking computers supposedly in one country but probably all over the world because of IP weirdness. An attack on tech in general is somewhat of a political statement that you would like to side with the less tech dependent people, at the expense of the more technical side. This could destroy records at a Children's hospital. It could affect peace protesters. I'm not sure that anything that preferentially targets technical people while leaving those with analog-first lives unaffected is useful. It's stirring up chaos, giving power to those who benefit from chaos. Does that not include those who benefit from war? Maybe I'm wrong and this is actually going to being about world peace. But to me, it seems pretty random and poorly thought out.

thot_experiment 5y ago
> But to me, it seems pretty random and poorly thought out. I agree with this, it's not a move I personally would do, but yet I can't condemn it either. Lashing out like this when faced with the horrors of war makes sense to me. > What I don't agree with is the idea of structuring society to benefit antifragile people and encourage more to become such. I agree with the sentiment here, but on some level I feel that an increase in antifragility is necessary to combat the centralization of power. It strikes me as the only way to prevent bad actors in positions of power for ruining it for everyone else.

thot_experiment 5y ago

> But to me, it seems pretty random and poorly thought out. I agree with this, it's not a move I personally would do, but yet I can't condemn it either. Lashing out like this when faced with the horrors of war makes sense to me. > What I don't agree with is the idea of structuring society to benefit antifragile people and encourage more to become such. I agree with the sentiment here, but on some level I feel that an increase in antifragility is necessary to combat the centralization of power. It strikes me as the only way to prevent bad actors in positions of power for ruining it for everyone else.