4 ms·

and when did you stop beating your wife? > is the pay good enough to justify the atrocities you help to perpetrate? C'mon, not every ad jockey is flogging fos

by defrost 3mo ago

and when did you stop beating your wife? > is the pay good enough to justify the atrocities you help to perpetrate? C'mon, not every ad jockey is flogging fossil fuels, and even some that do repent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcrekESgFQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcrekESgFQI * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Carey_(novelist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Carey_(novelist)

weregiraffe 3mo ago
Oh, I consider ads-driven economy an atrocity.
- defrost 3mo ago
  Of possible interest, Ballard's The Atrocity Exhibition is themed abut mass media intrusion into private mind spaces, Carey's Bliss about an ad exec whose heart stops, re-awakening convinced he is in hell (but merely life with the scales fallen from his eyes). Such things are still not reason to dis other HN commentators - there's always reddit for that.
  - datsci_est_2015 3mo ago
    > Such things are still not reason to dis other HN commentators - there's always reddit for that. Mmm, this I disagree with particularly. I view HN as a forum dedicated to the technology professions, and as such, it’s an extremely appropriate place to shame those in the profession who refuse to consider the second-order effects of their work. We (those in the technology profession) have no union through which we can encourage professional standards and ethics and codes of conduct. Shame is pretty much the only and last bastion for those of us who care about how we make our money, and not just the amount written on the paycheck. I know there are some people, both in this forum, and who I’ve met in person - (“Raytheon? How do you feel about the moral dilemma of working for a weapons manufacturer?” … “We manufacture weapons? I just work in HR.”) - who will never lose an ounce of sleep considering their line of work due to an underdeveloped sense of ethics. But there are some people who are in the middle ground who can still be won over. Every year that passes it becomes more important that technologists are aware of the ethical implications of their work - no matter how much capital incentivizes the opposite. Don’t let a paycheck delude you.
    - defrost 3mo ago
      > Mmm, this I disagree with particularly. I'd suggest taking that up with Paul Graham, @dang, and @tomhow - they would respond that curious conversation about second order effects is what they seek - sans the direct personal attacks seeking to directly shame another person for their choices. > How do you feel about the moral dilemma of working for a weapons manufacturer? Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc. > Every year that passes it becomes more important that technologists are aware of the ethical implications of their work Agreed - that doesn't imply you should call perceived less enlightened others names or champion throwing them in the stocks .. such things rarely convert and often harden resistance.
      - datsci_est_2015 3mo ago
        We can argue about whether the OP should have found a more elegant way to call out the commenter he was responding to, of course. But I stand my ground firm that this industry needs an extreme dose of self-reflection injected directly to its heart, and shame seems to be an effective medium available to us as peer technologists. There are different methods of shaming, of course, but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed. Furthermore, whether someone does feel ashamed because of what someone commented should not be a criteria for whether a comment is a “personal attack”. Humans use shame to correct antisocial behavior, and humans feel shame in order to avoid antisocial behavior. The technology professions are rife with antisocial behavior. Our leaders are chosen and their behavior is optimized as antisocial, for shareholder (and personal) short-term growth. > Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc. This is an entirely different subject that I don’t think we should get sidetracked by. I’ll just recommend Die Physiker (or one of its translations) as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented.
        defrost 3mo ago
        > as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented As a gentle reminder, it was yourself that raised weapons as a moral dilemma, I responded with no argument other than a plain observation. > but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed More often they likely sleep deeply on sheets of insanely high thread count, shame only goes so far to effect change. > I’ll just recommend Die Physiker If I recall correctly that came up when I had a long discussion with Mark Oliphant in the late 1970s, William Tutte had a few books of his own to recommend on similar themes not long after.
saghm 3mo ago
Given that the parent comment literally stated that they worked in adtech, this is not "begging the question" in the way that you're implying. You might disagree with the assertion that adtech is immoral, but that's a difference of opinion, not evidence of a logical fallacy.
- defrost 3mo ago
  It gets old linking to the HN comment guidelines whenever one user goes at another user in a direct and personal way. Loaded accusations are exactly that, not questions being begged, nor logical fallacy or mere differences of opinion. Ergo sometimes I opt for not just quoting and linking to https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - saghm 3mo ago
    That's a fair criticism; it's just not the same one you initially gave. I can understand being frustrated having to link the guidelines, but like, that's what they're there for!
21asdffdsa12 3mo ago
infinite_spin - you are dead. Which is quite the spin for an advertiser- one could say even infinite_spin

by defrost 3mo ago

weregiraffe 3mo ago

Oh, I consider ads-driven economy an atrocity.

defrost 3mo ago
Of possible interest, Ballard's The Atrocity Exhibition is themed abut mass media intrusion into private mind spaces, Carey's Bliss about an ad exec whose heart stops, re-awakening convinced he is in hell (but merely life with the scales fallen from his eyes). Such things are still not reason to dis other HN commentators - there's always reddit for that.
- datsci_est_2015 3mo ago
  > Such things are still not reason to dis other HN commentators - there's always reddit for that. Mmm, this I disagree with particularly. I view HN as a forum dedicated to the technology professions, and as such, it’s an extremely appropriate place to shame those in the profession who refuse to consider the second-order effects of their work. We (those in the technology profession) have no union through which we can encourage professional standards and ethics and codes of conduct. Shame is pretty much the only and last bastion for those of us who care about how we make our money, and not just the amount written on the paycheck. I know there are some people, both in this forum, and who I’ve met in person - (“Raytheon? How do you feel about the moral dilemma of working for a weapons manufacturer?” … “We manufacture weapons? I just work in HR.”) - who will never lose an ounce of sleep considering their line of work due to an underdeveloped sense of ethics. But there are some people who are in the middle ground who can still be won over. Every year that passes it becomes more important that technologists are aware of the ethical implications of their work - no matter how much capital incentivizes the opposite. Don’t let a paycheck delude you.
  - defrost 3mo ago
    > Mmm, this I disagree with particularly. I'd suggest taking that up with Paul Graham, @dang, and @tomhow - they would respond that curious conversation about second order effects is what they seek - sans the direct personal attacks seeking to directly shame another person for their choices. > How do you feel about the moral dilemma of working for a weapons manufacturer? Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc. > Every year that passes it becomes more important that technologists are aware of the ethical implications of their work Agreed - that doesn't imply you should call perceived less enlightened others names or champion throwing them in the stocks .. such things rarely convert and often harden resistance.
    - datsci_est_2015 3mo ago
      We can argue about whether the OP should have found a more elegant way to call out the commenter he was responding to, of course. But I stand my ground firm that this industry needs an extreme dose of self-reflection injected directly to its heart, and shame seems to be an effective medium available to us as peer technologists. There are different methods of shaming, of course, but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed. Furthermore, whether someone does feel ashamed because of what someone commented should not be a criteria for whether a comment is a “personal attack”. Humans use shame to correct antisocial behavior, and humans feel shame in order to avoid antisocial behavior. The technology professions are rife with antisocial behavior. Our leaders are chosen and their behavior is optimized as antisocial, for shareholder (and personal) short-term growth. > Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc. This is an entirely different subject that I don’t think we should get sidetracked by. I’ll just recommend Die Physiker (or one of its translations) as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented.
      - defrost 3mo ago
        > as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented As a gentle reminder, it was yourself that raised weapons as a moral dilemma, I responded with no argument other than a plain observation. > but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed More often they likely sleep deeply on sheets of insanely high thread count, shame only goes so far to effect change. > I’ll just recommend Die Physiker If I recall correctly that came up when I had a long discussion with Mark Oliphant in the late 1970s, William Tutte had a few books of his own to recommend on similar themes not long after.

saghm 3mo ago

Given that the parent comment literally stated that they worked in adtech, this is not "begging the question" in the way that you're implying. You might disagree with the assertion that adtech is immoral, but that's a difference of opinion, not evidence of a logical fallacy.

defrost 3mo ago
It gets old linking to the HN comment guidelines whenever one user goes at another user in a direct and personal way. Loaded accusations are exactly that, not questions being begged, nor logical fallacy or mere differences of opinion. Ergo sometimes I opt for not just quoting and linking to https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- saghm 3mo ago
  That's a fair criticism; it's just not the same one you initially gave. I can understand being frustrated having to link the guidelines, but like, that's what they're there for!

21asdffdsa12 3mo ago

infinite_spin - you are dead. Which is quite the spin for an advertiser- one could say even infinite_spin