3 ms·

Even if more illegal wars are started in the Middle East, even if inequality gets more obscene, VCs on HN are still going to insist that We The Good Guys are th

Even if more illegal wars are started in the Middle East, even if inequality gets more obscene, VCs on HN are still going to insist that We The Good Guys are the champions of freedom, equality, justice, all the good stuff that we don’t practice (but we have great ideas about).

JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
> VCs on HN are still going to insist that We The Good Guys are the champions of freedom, equality, justice, all the good stuff that we don’t practice (but we have great ideas about) They might. I’m not. There is an analogy here to perfect being the enemy of good. Or, at the very least, the pragmatic better.
- keybored 8mo ago
  It’s the usual feigned comparison. America is a republic and if you don’t agree well, go to Reddit and argue about it; meanwhile China is just a dictatorship. American “crimes“ are dismissed with some rhetorical non-response like “hmmph, no one claimed we are perfect”, or immediately contrasted with some arbitrary Chinese “crime”, then dropped just as fast; even someone bringing up contemporary killing of Iranian schoolchildren gets contrasted with the “Indian Removal Act stuff” as if, you know, someone didn’t just now bring up something that America did last week. You bring up the ideal of “the American experiment”, then when someone brings up inconvenient facts the Tiananmen Square Massacre makes an appearance. But to your credit you brought up the Pretti shooting. I have to analyze how that demonstrates why the “AI values” should reflect American ones. Judge my enemies by their actions. Judge me by my words. About myself...
  - linkregister 8mo ago
    At no point have any of your arguers said they approve of the crimes perpetrated by the United States government. You repeatedly talk past them while only tangentially addressing their points. Your comments assume bad faith and make liberal use of pejoratives. My recommendation is to self-reflect.
    - raven12345 8mo ago
      He was simply saying that the same actions China takes are repeatedly brought up, while those the US takes are forgotten after a while.
      - linkregister 8mo ago
        That is a charitable interpretation. I should follow your example.
        keybored 8mo ago
        It’s good that you are reflecting.
        deleted 8mo ago
        [deleted]
      - fc417fc802 8mo ago
        He threw out a bunch of non sequiturs and failed to engage with what was actually said. On what basis do you claim that US wrongdoing is forgotten? If you bring it up it's acknowledged and talked about. Debating it is within the realm of social acceptability. You can look it up on Wikipedia. Our AI models will happily discuss it with you. Meanwhile the Chinese equivalent gets you the sorts of disingenuous interactions that can be seen here and domestically much of the information appears to be censored.
    - keybored 8mo ago
      Pejoratives?
      - keybored 8mo ago
        Note that singling out this part is not some tacit acceptance of the rest of that comment.
      - keybored 7mo ago
  - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
    > American “crimes“ are dismissed with some rhetorical non-response like “hmmph, no one claimed we are perfect”, or immediately contrasted with some arbitrary Chinese “crime”, then dropped just as fast America debates and exhibits its faults, at least internally. The Tulsa Massacre is a movie and cultural discussion point in a way Tiananmen Square is not in China. Neither should have happened. And neither is universally acknowledged or atoned for. But if we’re debating which system AI should emulate, I know it’s not just the one that explicitly buries its faults. > Judge my enemies by their actions. Judge me by my words Judge both by both. The ability to have words about shameful actions is not meaningless.
    - keybored 8mo ago
      Yeah you talk about how you stumble into wars. Then you do it again. Then eventually it gets relegated to bah, but who is perfect. (Let me tell you who is not perfect: it’s China) This is a concept that a twelve-year-old has enough ego formation to understand. Not so for the shared nationalistic consciousness.
      - fc417fc802 8mo ago
        Your responses seem politically charged and not in good faith. You've failed to actually engage with what the person you're responding to wrote several times now. What is your goal here?
        keybored 8mo ago
        > Your responses seem politically charged We are talking about China and the US. > and not in good faith. I am playing with open cards. No hidden agendas. > You've failed to actually engage with what the person you're responding to wrote several times now. We disagree on the very premises. That leads to one person saying something then the other one dismissing it then the first person dismissing what the second person says in turn. Completely normal. > What is your goal here? To bemoan people glorifying America as it invades countries and causes problems for the whole world.

JumpCrisscross 8mo ago

> VCs on HN are still going to insist that We The Good Guys are the champions of freedom, equality, justice, all the good stuff that we don’t practice (but we have great ideas about) They might. I’m not. There is an analogy here to perfect being the enemy of good. Or, at the very least, the pragmatic better.

keybored 8mo ago
It’s the usual feigned comparison. America is a republic and if you don’t agree well, go to Reddit and argue about it; meanwhile China is just a dictatorship. American “crimes“ are dismissed with some rhetorical non-response like “hmmph, no one claimed we are perfect”, or immediately contrasted with some arbitrary Chinese “crime”, then dropped just as fast; even someone bringing up contemporary killing of Iranian schoolchildren gets contrasted with the “Indian Removal Act stuff” as if, you know, someone didn’t just now bring up something that America did last week. You bring up the ideal of “the American experiment”, then when someone brings up inconvenient facts the Tiananmen Square Massacre makes an appearance. But to your credit you brought up the Pretti shooting. I have to analyze how that demonstrates why the “AI values” should reflect American ones. Judge my enemies by their actions. Judge me by my words. About myself...
- linkregister 8mo ago
  At no point have any of your arguers said they approve of the crimes perpetrated by the United States government. You repeatedly talk past them while only tangentially addressing their points. Your comments assume bad faith and make liberal use of pejoratives. My recommendation is to self-reflect.
  - raven12345 8mo ago
    He was simply saying that the same actions China takes are repeatedly brought up, while those the US takes are forgotten after a while.
    - linkregister 8mo ago
      That is a charitable interpretation. I should follow your example.
      - keybored 8mo ago
        It’s good that you are reflecting.
        deleted 8mo ago
        [deleted]
    - fc417fc802 8mo ago
      He threw out a bunch of non sequiturs and failed to engage with what was actually said. On what basis do you claim that US wrongdoing is forgotten? If you bring it up it's acknowledged and talked about. Debating it is within the realm of social acceptability. You can look it up on Wikipedia. Our AI models will happily discuss it with you. Meanwhile the Chinese equivalent gets you the sorts of disingenuous interactions that can be seen here and domestically much of the information appears to be censored.
  - keybored 8mo ago
    Pejoratives?
    - keybored 8mo ago
      Note that singling out this part is not some tacit acceptance of the rest of that comment.
    - keybored 7mo ago
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
  > American “crimes“ are dismissed with some rhetorical non-response like “hmmph, no one claimed we are perfect”, or immediately contrasted with some arbitrary Chinese “crime”, then dropped just as fast America debates and exhibits its faults, at least internally. The Tulsa Massacre is a movie and cultural discussion point in a way Tiananmen Square is not in China. Neither should have happened. And neither is universally acknowledged or atoned for. But if we’re debating which system AI should emulate, I know it’s not just the one that explicitly buries its faults. > Judge my enemies by their actions. Judge me by my words Judge both by both. The ability to have words about shameful actions is not meaningless.
  - keybored 8mo ago
    Yeah you talk about how you stumble into wars. Then you do it again. Then eventually it gets relegated to bah, but who is perfect. (Let me tell you who is not perfect: it’s China) This is a concept that a twelve-year-old has enough ego formation to understand. Not so for the shared nationalistic consciousness.
    - fc417fc802 8mo ago
      Your responses seem politically charged and not in good faith. You've failed to actually engage with what the person you're responding to wrote several times now. What is your goal here?
      - keybored 8mo ago
        > Your responses seem politically charged We are talking about China and the US. > and not in good faith. I am playing with open cards. No hidden agendas. > You've failed to actually engage with what the person you're responding to wrote several times now. We disagree on the very premises. That leads to one person saying something then the other one dismissing it then the first person dismissing what the second person says in turn. Completely normal. > What is your goal here? To bemoan people glorifying America as it invades countries and causes problems for the whole world.