7 ms·

> "If we have optimism, but we don't have empathy – then it doesn't matter how much we master the secrets of science, we're not really solving problems; we're j

• jejones3141 12y ago
  I wonder how much empathy was involved in writing the AARD code. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code)
  • hyperliner 12y ago
    Dude, after 22 years, and you cannot look forward?
    • elevenfist 12y ago
      It may be important to think about what they might do and say if they were no longer rich, and forced to earn their fortune again. Would they do what they did again? Would they behave in the same way?
      • csallen 12y ago
        I don't see why or how this could be important. It's possible to craft circumstances in which anyone would do almost anything. Numerous studies have shown that human morality and ethics are highly situational rather than permanently ingrained into the cores of our beings.
  • pcunite 12y ago
    I'll take a sinner turned saint over continued arrogance any day.
    • CamperBob2 12y ago
      (Shrug) It's easier to trust people who don't do things like that in the normal course of business. Can a leopard change its spots?
      • csallen 12y ago
        This leopard-changing-its-spots analogy is the wrong way to look at things. It assumes that ethics and morality are permanently writ onto our cores, and that to change those values, one would have to become another person entirely. This is a false belief. As I mentioned in a comment below, numerous studies have shown that a person's ethics are heavily influenced by their present circumstances and environment, not some unchangeable inner nature.
        • davidp 12y ago
          > a person's ethics are primarily dictated by their present circumstances and environment Citation needed. I can accept "influenced by" or even "heavily influenced by" without too much argument, but "primarily dictated by" is an extraordinary claim, requiring extraordinary proof.
          • deleted 12y ago
            [deleted]
          • csallen 12y ago
            Don't know why people are downvoting you. I support your comment, and changed my wording.
          • ThomPete 12y ago
            It is rather normal for people to change their political stance over the years as they go from young people who think they live forever to people with kids and responsibilities. Its probably not as obvious here in the US with a two party system but other places like Denmark and Sweden you see this change more clearly.
      • 12y ago
  • Karunamon 12y ago
    Enough, as that code never actually did anything in any released version of Windows. From the same article: Microsoft disabled the AARD code for the final release of Windows 3.1
  • hnnewguy 12y ago
    Uh, it was code that would have prevented Windows from running on computers that ran competing software (which never appeared in the release). Is it common practice today, everywhere, to allow your software to run on "competing" systems? Can I install OSX anywhere I want, without a work around? Stupid, yes. But calling it a "sin" is why I have a hard time taking religious views seriously.
    • jejones3141 12y ago
      Why would Microsoft go to such lengths as they did to hide the AARD code if they thought it, or perhaps more accurately, thought that others would consider it, ethical?
• crassus 12y ago
  Empathy is easy. Building something worth a damn is hard, and incredibly rare in human history.