3 ms·

There are lots of people that contribute less to society than they consume, and they are morally OK with that.

threeseed 3y ago
Based on what though. You could argue that many developers are a net-negative for society given that the industry wastes a lot of time building X idea in Y language for every combination of Y.
- systemvoltage 3y ago
  There are lots of people that are not as productive. Fine. But it is the moral part that I have a problem with. They are morally proud that they don't contribute to the society. "Don't be a burden on others" is one of the values I grew up with. Should be a universally good thing IMO.
  - klabb3 3y ago
    I could sit on my ass and play games all day, reek in all the unemployment benefits I possibly could, and still be nowhere near the bottom of net contribution to society. The amount of social benefits that remain in people’s pockets after the grifters have taken their share are rounding errors compared to say bank bailouts and government subsidies (in the US). I don’t think being a burden on others is good, but it’s nothing compared to active destruction, which can come with huge force multipliers. Every large organization have high ranked people that are rewarded for their destruction. There are entire industries dedicated to leeching off of honest people, like tax prep and time shares.
    - systemvoltage 3y ago
      Seems like this entire thread is strawmaning in the worst possible way. Where did I say that active destruction is moral good? We can condemn both but my point was explicitly to people that don't contribute to society by moral virtue. Yet others making other flimsy strawmen.
  - threeseed 3y ago
    Maybe they are just more self aware and intellectually honest. Rather than pretending that their latest open source project which is 99% the same as a dozen others is some extraordinary contribution to society.
sangnoir 3y ago
Why does it feel you're describing everyone who is not an able-bodied 18-65 year old?
- CatWChainsaw 3y ago
  Because they're insinuating it.

Based on what though. You could argue that many developers are a net-negative for society given that the industry wastes a lot of time building X idea in Y language for every combination of Y.

systemvoltage 3y ago
There are lots of people that are not as productive. Fine. But it is the moral part that I have a problem with. They are morally proud that they don't contribute to the society. "Don't be a burden on others" is one of the values I grew up with. Should be a universally good thing IMO.
- klabb3 3y ago
  I could sit on my ass and play games all day, reek in all the unemployment benefits I possibly could, and still be nowhere near the bottom of net contribution to society. The amount of social benefits that remain in people’s pockets after the grifters have taken their share are rounding errors compared to say bank bailouts and government subsidies (in the US). I don’t think being a burden on others is good, but it’s nothing compared to active destruction, which can come with huge force multipliers. Every large organization have high ranked people that are rewarded for their destruction. There are entire industries dedicated to leeching off of honest people, like tax prep and time shares.
  - systemvoltage 3y ago
    Seems like this entire thread is strawmaning in the worst possible way. Where did I say that active destruction is moral good? We can condemn both but my point was explicitly to people that don't contribute to society by moral virtue. Yet others making other flimsy strawmen.
- threeseed 3y ago
  Maybe they are just more self aware and intellectually honest. Rather than pretending that their latest open source project which is 99% the same as a dozen others is some extraordinary contribution to society.

sangnoir 3y ago

Why does it feel you're describing everyone who is not an able-bodied 18-65 year old?

CatWChainsaw 3y ago
Because they're insinuating it.