3 ms·

I am, personally. If everyone ignored the rules and laws, we wouldn't have much of a society.

by poincaredisk 2y ago

maeil 2y ago
If everyone had abided by rules and laws, the US would still have hard segregation laws, etc.
- tremon 2y ago
  If everyone had abided by rules and laws, the US wouldn't exist as a country.
  - fl0id 2y ago
    Yeah, and rules and laws are never just, just because of their nature. Like dictators have laws… incompetent governments have laws… so law itself is a bad argument to follow it and a lot of socio-legal literature actually recognizes that social processes and to some degree social contracts that can include the exact opposite of the law are often at least as important.
    - perching_aix 2y ago
      On it's own this doesn't justify neither the abolishment of law nor its disregarding at-scale. That said, nor do I think anyone was actually going for that angle here, so I think we're getting side-tracked.
  - nuancebydefault 2y ago
    Rules and laws made by whom?
- perching_aix 2y ago
  How do you know that?
athrowaway3z 2y ago
>Only a Sith deals in absolutes Even cliche children stories know your reasoning is ridiculous at best.
- perching_aix 2y ago
  I don't think they're "dealing in absolutes" nearly as much as you might be perceiving that they do. It's further ironic for you to mention this in a thread that was kicked off with this: > The price of freedom is disobedience. (a statement heavily dealing in absolutes)
  - salawat 2y ago
    Not the case. Freedom is orthogonal to legality. To exercise freedom is to fundamentally admit the possibility of disobedience within any sort of rules based framework.
    - perching_aix 2y ago
      What is not the case?
- luckylion 2y ago
  You can disagree with him, but it's a good idea to have read Kant when forming an opinion on those types of things.
toomuchtodo 2y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHqDEMrqTjE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHqDEMrqTjE ("DEF CON 32 - Counter Deception: Defending Yourself in a World Full of Lies - Tom Cross, Greg Conti") "At their best, hackers lift their heads up above the masses to see how the world actually works, not how it purports to work, and then take action to make the world a better place." https://paulgraham.com/founders.html https://paulgraham.com/founders.html > 4. Naughtiness: Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil. They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter. This quality may be redundant though; it may be implied by imagination. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)#Chaotic_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragon... > A chaotic good character does whatever is necessary to bring about change for the better, disdains bureaucratic organizations that get in the way of social improvement, and places a high value on personal freedom, not only for oneself but for others as well. Chaotic good characters usually intend to do the right thing, but their methods are generally disorganized and often out of sync with the rest of society. If you're here, you're likely not just smart, but your brain likely works in a way where you can rapidly deconstruct a system or build a mental model of one up, understanding how and where all of the parts must operate for the system to function. Many rules matter, but some don't; you are outcome oriented while operating within the system you exist in. You are willing to operate outside of the system when the situation dictates. "Hacker" is an interesting term, but overloaded from both a historical and persona perspective. I propose "Adaptive Strategist," "Outcome Engineer," or "Creative Resolver" to better describe this type of human. Someone highly capable, adaptable, and with the fortitude and grit to grind toward success in a morally directional manner.
- luckylion 2y ago
  > Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's how you end up with price-collusion-as-a-service for landlords to price-gouge. When you don't define "the big questions", every evil can just be something naughty and you can explain it away by saying that the person has "the big questions" in mind, and not these small ones. Is anyone surprised that most startups that "just ignore the small things" also ignore the big ones once they are big? > Someone highly capable, adaptable, and with the fortitude and grit to grind toward success in a morally directional manner. What do you mean by "morally directional"? What do you call a person with the same abilities and traits but concern for ethics? Are they not a hacker?

I am, personally. If everyone ignored the rules and laws, we wouldn't have much of a society.

maeil 2y ago

If everyone had abided by rules and laws, the US would still have hard segregation laws, etc.

tremon 2y ago
If everyone had abided by rules and laws, the US wouldn't exist as a country.
- fl0id 2y ago
  Yeah, and rules and laws are never just, just because of their nature. Like dictators have laws… incompetent governments have laws… so law itself is a bad argument to follow it and a lot of socio-legal literature actually recognizes that social processes and to some degree social contracts that can include the exact opposite of the law are often at least as important.
  - perching_aix 2y ago
    On it's own this doesn't justify neither the abolishment of law nor its disregarding at-scale. That said, nor do I think anyone was actually going for that angle here, so I think we're getting side-tracked.
- nuancebydefault 2y ago
  Rules and laws made by whom?
perching_aix 2y ago
How do you know that?

athrowaway3z 2y ago

>Only a Sith deals in absolutes Even cliche children stories know your reasoning is ridiculous at best.

perching_aix 2y ago
I don't think they're "dealing in absolutes" nearly as much as you might be perceiving that they do. It's further ironic for you to mention this in a thread that was kicked off with this: > The price of freedom is disobedience. (a statement heavily dealing in absolutes)
- salawat 2y ago
  Not the case. Freedom is orthogonal to legality. To exercise freedom is to fundamentally admit the possibility of disobedience within any sort of rules based framework.
  - perching_aix 2y ago
    What is not the case?
luckylion 2y ago
You can disagree with him, but it's a good idea to have read Kant when forming an opinion on those types of things.

toomuchtodo 2y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHqDEMrqTjE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHqDEMrqTjE ("DEF CON 32 - Counter Deception: Defending Yourself in a World Full of Lies - Tom Cross, Greg Conti") "At their best, hackers lift their heads up above the masses to see how the world actually works, not how it purports to work, and then take action to make the world a better place." https://paulgraham.com/founders.html https://paulgraham.com/founders.html > 4. Naughtiness: Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil. They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter. This quality may be redundant though; it may be implied by imagination. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)#Chaotic_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragon... > A chaotic good character does whatever is necessary to bring about change for the better, disdains bureaucratic organizations that get in the way of social improvement, and places a high value on personal freedom, not only for oneself but for others as well. Chaotic good characters usually intend to do the right thing, but their methods are generally disorganized and often out of sync with the rest of society. If you're here, you're likely not just smart, but your brain likely works in a way where you can rapidly deconstruct a system or build a mental model of one up, understanding how and where all of the parts must operate for the system to function. Many rules matter, but some don't; you are outcome oriented while operating within the system you exist in. You are willing to operate outside of the system when the situation dictates. "Hacker" is an interesting term, but overloaded from both a historical and persona perspective. I propose "Adaptive Strategist," "Outcome Engineer," or "Creative Resolver" to better describe this type of human. Someone highly capable, adaptable, and with the fortitude and grit to grind toward success in a morally directional manner.

luckylion 2y ago
> Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's how you end up with price-collusion-as-a-service for landlords to price-gouge. When you don't define "the big questions", every evil can just be something naughty and you can explain it away by saying that the person has "the big questions" in mind, and not these small ones. Is anyone surprised that most startups that "just ignore the small things" also ignore the big ones once they are big? > Someone highly capable, adaptable, and with the fortitude and grit to grind toward success in a morally directional manner. What do you mean by "morally directional"? What do you call a person with the same abilities and traits but concern for ethics? Are they not a hacker?