r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
Doing business with the ICE and facilitating human rights violations is *gasp* political? Is sexism (against women) really a thing? Is climate change that big of a deal? The very rational™ and bigly decoupled users of Hacker News™ discuss. (https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/jzeuth/doing_business_with_the_ice_and_facilitating/)

In the end refusing selling a computer to ICE should be like refusing to sell a soda to a black person: a clear case of discrimination. And companies should be threatened with dissolution if so; moral focused groups can then just create foundations or churches instead.

The Civil Rights Understander has logged on.

"I'm just a simple pesticide seller" says Degesch GmbH

[deleted]

'Planet will still be there, checkmate hippies!'
All the atoms that made up humanity will be around for ages, stop whining.
Unless those motes of human dust get in enough eyes, in which case this really was a bad thing.
It mostly relates to the skynet nutjobs, who came up with the whole "existential risk" idea so that they can proclaim that the nuclear war isn't an "existential risk" and their AI nonsense is the only one. For being that into eugenics they seem surprisingly unconcerned with the wasteland roaming human future in a world where bears and big cats are gone (and other apes too, and literally anything hungry people could catch and eat), opening up a pretty good niche our descendants could fill. A million years could do what they keep constantly fearing a century would do. Without other large animals, we would be the "megafauna" to either shrink or go extinct altogether.
What I find funny about your particular framing here is that of course skynet in the movies was not only a clear metaphor for the existential risk RAND Corporation ethical calculations proposed - an 80s version of Dr. Strangelove - but that the actual skynet in the movies used nuclear weapons to murder everyone, because the movies *are about the fucking cold war* It’s amusing that people who got heavily into this sci-fi shit and started writing screeds entirely based on it never noticed that it’s *metaphorical*
Yeah, intentional on my part. Although in the movies the nukes left survivors, hence the nukes themselves in the movie are not an "existential risk". Kurt Vonnegut had a novel, Galapagos, where the population bottleneck results in humans just taking an aquatic mammal niche. It's not the lack of selection that one has to worry about (as rationalists usually do), but selection for a different niche - e.g. one for smaller, faster maturing, shorter living animals (over hundreds of thousands / millions of years it'd take to recover from an extreme population bottleneck and loss of technology).
Oh yeah I’m on your side here I haven’t read Galapagos but perhaps I should, I always enjoy Vonnegut even when I don’t

A lot of HN posters seems to be like ents.

  • uses to much words to say things
  • women left them and they don’t get why
  • don’t get they are part of the world
Marvelous sneer.

ah yes, it’s only political if it goes against the status quo.

same sort of thing as the two genders, male and political.

or the two sexual orientations, straight and political.

or the two classes, wealthy and political.

“Maybe we should target the core problem, instead of making it about gender.” Just trickle-down dogma again, but by a different name.

Sidenote on tomatoes: the reason kids don’t eat them (as well as pretty much any vegetables) is that they’re bland and tasteless, and the reason they’re bland and tasteless is that we made them that way. If you live in a proper country that doesn’t take a giant dump on its population’s diet for the sake of yield maximization and/or go to a local market that actually cares about its products you will soon find out that you don’t need to force yourself to eat vegetables, because they actually taste good.

No comment on the rest of this shitshow, HN is gonna HN

Tasty vegetables? [cries in protestant].

The kind of extreme “guilt by association” you derive cannot be considered a part of the political in terms of conscious action precisely because “the political” encompasses normal function of the society. Criminal activity, on the other hand, is not considered a part of normal function of a society, hence one can assume that everyone who “knows” a criminal but doesn’t turn him in is also a criminal. In other words what you’re doing is you are criminalizing normal para-political association—a characteristic of individuals with a totalitarian mindset. As a non-American, I have to say I am stunned to observe this attitude in the US.

thinking emoji

It's not political, it's the normal function of society. And now, to drink this water cylinder... what? No, it's not in a "glass", that's just the normal shape of water

I love love love how HN turns everything into coding somehow.

Is there a way to go back from your binary opposition:

to at least a ternary

Don’t know why CS people feel the constant need to do this. Recently I was talking to someone and they mentioned how one class has fewer context switches than another. I get you took Operating System design but you can just say “focused on one thing more”.

They watched the Matrix one too many times and think everything is data. I'm kind of joking, but there does seem a tendency among some in the field to think everything can reduced to a CS standpoint. Brains are computers, nerves are wires, that sort of thing. And I think they fail to see that to the extent this is true, it is true for basically everything and isn't actually all that informative.
I must say I'm guilty of this as well. But CS has a tendency to bill itself as, everything can and **should** be reduced to a CS problem. CS definitely gives people unwavering confidence that they can conquer any other problems present in any other fields.
Clearly you haven't been enlightened enough by Max Tegmark.
Eh there's actually some pretty interesting ontological work done in the last 40 years thinking of reality in terms of dataflow so I wouldn't dismiss thst out of hand.
Information Theory/Infomatics and Computer Science are not the same thing
What's the distinction you think?
Well they have a related but far from identical history, and study different issues, which seems like a pretty clear distinction To put it another way: if you think Information Theory is just Computer Science you think the same thing about Physics and Computer Science
Would it be fair to say computer science is a subset though?
Not really. Computer science deals with the theory and practice of computation specifically. Information theory deals with the very concept of information.
Not trying to argue with you, just genuinely curious for your viewpoint: Isn't computation just what information does? Like if you're studying computation, it's inherently tied to information, no?
Computation and Information are conceptually distinct, as demonstrated by the sort of thing you’ll find in Turing. Information is the stuff that makes computation work (at least in theory), but not vice versa. Certainly studying computation will involve studying information, but there is no guarantee that studying computation will create a study of information rather than the practice of attempting to study information.
So is that like a "all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are square" situation?
Eh... Context switching is pretty common parlance. I'm a designer and I have only ever heard that in the context of human psychology. Never knew it was also an os term
And as is tradition I suppose, that third option completely misses the point and only serves to obfuscate the matter at hand. His new options are > - "I support what you are doing and will contribute to your cause" - "I don't care what you are doing and will sell you the same services as to anyone else (I am only interested in your money)" - "I oppose what you are doing and will do what I can to impede your cause" boiling down to * "(I support you and) I contribute to your cause" * "(I don't give a fuck and) I contribute to your cause" * "(I don't support you and) I don't contribute to your cause" which implies that the relevant part is somehow what degree of support you voice instead of whether you contribute.
Who'd have guessed that racking one's brain for hours a day trying to fit the world into rigidly defined schemas would turn a lot of people into gormless fascist subjects

PS: I can’t link individual comments :(

Click on the posting time link for a comment, like “11 hours ago.”

Here’s an example link to one of the comments you mentioned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25183241

It blows my mind that rayiner is a lawyer because of dumb he comes across as in his posts.

If anyone here enjoys sneering at ” “Hacker” “News” “, I highly recommend the n-gate.com weekly digest.