HN user

PavlovsCat

4,237 karma

Es war einemal eine glückliche Zeit, als Menschen frei wählen konnten; Lieber tot als Sklav', lieber stehend sterben, als auf den Knien leben. Es war einmal eine verruchte Zeit, als schwachsinnig gewordene Intellektuelle erklärten, das Leben sei der Güter höchstes. Gekommen ist heute die furchtbare Zeit, in der jeden Tag bewiesen wird, daß der Tod seine Schreckensherrschaft genau dann beginnt, wenn das Leben das höchste Gut geworden ist; daß der, der es vorzieht, auf den Knien zu leben, auf den Knien stirbt; daß niemand leichter zu morden ist als ein Sklave. Wir Lebenden haben zu lernen, daß man auf den Knien noch nicht einmal leben kann, daß man nicht unsterblich wird, wenn man dem Leben nachjagt, und daß, wenn man für nichts mehr sterben will, man stirbt, obwohl man nichts getan hat.

-- Hannah Arendt (1942)

So long as you are alive you have a place in all this and you play a role in it. Everyone here -- on the sidewalks, pedaling by on bicycles, looking at us, or not looking at us -- has a part he's playing in this story. Everyone is doing something that relates to us. They may kick sick guys in the belly as much as they like, or kill them, or force guys with the shits to remain closed up inside a church and then shoot them because they shit, or yell Alles Scheiße, alles Scheiße! for the millionth time, between them and us a relationship nevertheless exists that nothing can destroy. They know what they're doing, they know what's being done to us. They know it as well as if they were us. And they are. You are us. One looks at each of these creatures who doesn't know and one would like to get inside their consciousness that only wants to see a piece of striped cloth, a bearded face, a line of men with a martial SS figure at their head. They're going to ignore us; whenever we go through a town, it's a sleep of human beings that passes through a sleep of sleeping persons. That's how it appears. But we know; each group knows about the other, knows everything about it.

-- Robert Antelme, "The Human Race"

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.

-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

[..] intellectual freedom is a deep-rooted tradition without which our characteristic western culture could only doubtfully exist. From that tradition many of our intellectuals arc visibly turning away. They have accepted the principle that a book should be published or suppressed, praised or damned, not on its merits but according to political expediency. [..] If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. The common people still vaguely subscribe to that doctrine and act on it. In our country — it is not the same in all countries: it was not so in republican France, and it is not so in the USA today — it is the liberals who fear liberty and the intellectuals who want to do dirt on the intellect: it is to draw attention to that fact that I have written this preface.

-- George Orwell

If you wish to be useful, never take a course that will silence you. Refuse to learn anything that implies collusion, whether it be a clerkship or a curacy, a legal fee or a post in a university. Retain the power of speech no matter what other power you may lose. If you can take this course, and in so far as you take it, you will bless this country. In so far as you depart from this course, you become dampers, mutes, and hooded executioners.

-- John J. Chapman

Karl Jaspers on Censorship: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qjl4OYS6MoM

Hobbes was the true, though never fully recognized, philosopher of the bourgeoisie because he realized that acquisition of wealth conceived as a never-ending process can be guaranteed only by the seizure of political power, for the accumulating process must sooner or later force open all existing territorial limits. He foresaw that a society which had entered the path of never-ending acquisition had to engineer a dynamic political organization capable of a corresponding never-ending process of power generation. He even, through sheer force of imagination, was able to outline the main psychological traits of the new type of man who would fit into such a society and its tyrannical body politic. He foresaw the necessary idolatry of power itself by this new human type, that he would be flattered at being called a power-thirsty animal, although actually society would force him to surrender all his natural forces, his virtues and his vices, and would make him the poor meek little fellow who has not even the right to rise against tyranny, and who, far from striving for power, submits to any existing government and does not stir even when his best friend falls an innocent victim to an incomprehensible raison d'etat.

-- Hannah Arendt, "The Origins of Totalitarianism"

The salvation of the world depends only on the individual whose world it is. At least, every individual must act as if the whole future of the world, of humanity itself, depends on him. Anything less is a shirking of responsibility and is itself a dehumanizing force, for anything less encourages the individual to look upon himself as a mere actor in a drama written by anonymous agents, as less than a whole person, and that is the beginning of passivity and aimlessness.

-- Joseph Weizenbaum

The moral issue arose only with the phenomenon of "coordination," that is, not with fear-inspired hypocrisy, but with this very early eagerness not to miss the train of History, with this, as it were, honest overnight change of opinion that befell a great majority of public figures in all walks of life and all ramifications of culture, accompanied, as it was, by an incredible ease with which life long friendships were broken and discarded. In brief, what disturbed us was the behavior not of our enemies but of our friends, who had done nothing to bring this situation about. They were not responsible for the Nazis, they were only impressed by the Nazi success and unable to pit their own judgment against the verdict of History, as they read it. Without taking into account the almost universal breakdown, not of personal responsibility, but of personal judgment in the early stages of the Nazi regime, it is impossible to understand what actually happened.

-- Hannah Arendt, "Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorship"

Aber aus Liebe zu kommenden Generationen muß nach Beendigung des Krieges ein Exempel statuiert werden, daß niemand auch nur die geringste Lust je verspüren sollte, Ähnliches aufs neue zu versuchen. Vergeßt auch nicht die kleinen Schurken dieses Systems, merkt Euch die Namen, auf daß keiner entkomme! Es soll ihnen nicht gelingen, in letzter Minute noch nach diesen Scheußlichkeiten die Fahne zu wechseln und so zu tun, als ob nichts gewesen wäre!

-- Flugblatt #4 der Weißen Rose

Posts12
Comments2,912
View on HN

If people could understand what computing was about, the iPhone would not be a bad thing. But because people don’t understand what computing is about, they think they have it in the iPhone, and that illusion is as bad as the illusion that Guitar Hero is the same as a real guitar.

-- Alan Kay

Direct your complaints to the source of your problem, namely the shitty browsers on mobile. Even suggesting to let HN fix their abysmal stylesheet would be wrong. Go to the source -- and if it turns out they don't care about requests to provide actual tools, tell them off.

yet they want better and cheaper products - even free if possible.

I want good things, I have them, and now I want greedy, needy people to stop pushing their mediocre, poorly understood imitations to drown out the really good things we might use and nurture instead, hurting us all and even themselves in the process.

How do you think a company gets to improve and optimize their product? By surveys?

If what you make serves a purpose other than generating needs to make a profit from, then you'll probably be fine with mostly simply paying attention to what you're making, using it yourself, and occasionally making surveys and collecting metrics from volunteers to see if there's anything you missed.

It seems that search engines now are always trying to guess your intent, and always think they know better.

I complained about this from day one, and not once did I get anything but patronizing handwaving in response.

If I want to buy a pizza, I'll enter "buy pizza in $city" or something, but if I just enter "pizza", I want to see what every person on the planet would see if they used the English language version of the search engine (and then on top of that have the option of personal customization that I can undo or suspend anytime). IMO the convenience of "just typing 'pizza' when you want directions to the nearest pizza place" is nothing at all compared to the fracturing of the public space, for lack of a better way to put it.

Anyone remember Opera Mini, and how it could squeeze just about any site into just about any viewport width? I never used it on a smartphone, but I enjoyed playing with it on the desktop, it was like magic. Not always pretty, but very functional.

I would say the opposite is true, sanity and integrity can't prosper much without one another. Everybody dies, at some point, and to give up oneself to live in infinitely short amount longer (compared to eternity) is shitty a consolation price for those who don't really have themselves to begin with, who were compromised in childhood or youth, and live the rest of their lives slapping rationalizations on that.

Of course it is "more useful" to commit an injustice than to be victim of it; for the sake of the thinking dialogue with myself, this point of utility must be abandoned.

-- Hannah Arendt, "Wahrheit und Politik"

Natürlich ist es "nützlicher", Unrecht zu tun als Unrecht zu leiden; um des denkenden Dialogs mit mir selbst willen muss gerade dieser Nützlichkeitsstandpunkt aufgegeben werden.

Why do we travel? Among other things so we meet people who don't think they know us once and for all; so we may again experience what is possible in this life.

-- Max Frisch

Warum reisen wir? Auch dies, damit wir Menschen begegnen, die nicht meinen, daß sie uns kennen ein für allemal; damit wir noch einmal erfahren, was uns in diesem Leben möglich sei.

That is the reason the world is burning. Instead of running from where you don't see it, run to attack where you do see it.

It's better to fail as a good person than to succeed as a charlatan, and a bit of money can't plaster over the faculties of the mind drying up, among that the ability to resist charlatans in other contexts, including the political. "Business sophistry" is simply sophistry, brownnosing your boss is just brownnosing, and either you feed sophistry and naked emperors, or you don't. Everybody has "reasons", but more importantly, every day new people come into the world, and they deserve a clean shot at life more than crooked people deserve respect and comfort. Save your soul, you just have the one.

Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.

-- Kant

If every Chinese topic turns into the same "China vs. the rest of the world" discussion—or to put it more generally, if every thread gets sucked into whatever generic black hole happens to be nearby—then it becomes impossible to discuss anything specific on HN.

The trouble is that issue is that earnest discussion of these serious issues has been suppressed for more than a year, and that by now, talking about this "cute" stuff while pretending said suppression is going leaves a certain aftertaste. I guess in your mind, ignoring an elephant on the couch is just the thing a curious intelligent person acting in good faith would do. But that's just you.

The generic discussions are always the same

That's just as true for many articles about social media, node, golang, whatever. It can be demonstrated in 5 minutes that what you criticize consistently in one context, isn't even worth a mention in many, many others.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...

The aim of the missions was to track, and when the conditions were deemed right, kill suspected insurgents. That’s not how they put it, though. They would talk about “cutting the grass before it grows out of control”, or “pulling the weeds before they overrun the lawn”.

And then there were the children. The airmen would be flying the Predators over a village in the tribal areas of Pakistan, say, when a series of smaller black shadows would appear across their screens – telling them that kids were at the scene.

They called them “fun-sized terrorists”.

[..]

Toward the end of his service, Haas switched to training new recruits in the technology of drone warfare. That shocked him anew, as he discovered that many of the younger intake were gung-ho about the power they wielded at their fingertips. “They just wanted to kill,” he said.

He remembers one training session with a student in which they were flying live over Afghanistan. The student said that a group of people on the ground looked suspicious.

Why? Haas asked. Because they look like they are up to no good, the student replied.

Would you act on that? the instructor asked. Sure, the student said.

Haas immediately pulled him from his seat, took over the mission himself, and promptly failed the student. “I tried to get the students to understand that preservation of innocent life had to take priority.”

Because he failed the student, Haas was later rebuked by senior officers. They told him that they were short of bodies to keep the drones flying, and they ordered him to pass students in future so that there would be a sufficient number trained and ready to go.

Chomsky's talk titled "Corporate Attack on Education" held at St. Philip's Church, Harlem on March 16, 2012: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbMP-cy1INA

I think the university should tolerate a large diversity of opinion, which it does not. I think there is a severe failure - the failure is one of honesty, in my opinion. That is, I don't believe that scholarship within the university attempts to come to grips with the real structure of the society. I think it is under such narrow ideological controls that it avoids any concern or investigation of central issues in our society.

-- Noam Chomsky, interview in Business Today (May, 1973) https://chomsky.info/197305__/

[..] intellectual freedom is a deep-rooted tradition without which our characteristic western culture could only doubtfully exist. From that tradition many of our intellectuals are visibly turning away. They have accepted the principle that a book should be published or suppressed, praised or damned, not on its merits but according to political expediency. And others who do not actually hold this view assent to it from sheer cowardice.

-- George Orwell

Nasdaq runs algorithms to look for market abuse and manipulation in real time.

That's how you write honestly for the target audience.

Nasdaq runs more than 40 different algorithms, using about 35,000 parameters, to look for market abuse and manipulation in real time.

That is how you use big words on an audience not capable of seeing through their meaninglessness, and it's the responsibility of people who do see through it to call it out.

That's probably because it's an actually working and fun game, not some project where people spent more time giving talks or writing blog posts about it than all the people who can be bothered spent on playing it combined, and which is just a stepping stone to yet another half-assed thing nobody needs. Writing it perfectly the first time isn't possible because you don't know what exactly you're making until you made it, and rewriting it into something that behaves exactly the same for the user, but has nicer code, would be pointless masturbation.

for ideological and nationalistic battle

Weasel words are like your little lucky charm, aren't they? What "ideology" would that be? Resisting the ideology you peddle isn't an ideology. Not being a Nazi isn't a politcal stance. I'm German, I just don't march in goosestep -- criticizing something out of China is "national battle" in your mind. Nevermind I do the same for any other nation as well. Nevermind the mountains of sophistry you enclosed yourself in.

How is using flags and moderator privileges, how is you lying, not doing battle? I can actually argue my points, that is what you don't like. You pay lip service to what I do, and you never actually engage. The last time I asked you what's wrong with my comment, you couldn't say either. I told you then, if you can't actually point to a consisten principle you apply, if all you have is these weasel words, ban me or don't. You just ignored it.

So don't spit in my face and pretend it's snowing. You can do that on your own little site, you couldn't do it in an open forum where you actually have to own your words and can't just throw out a convenient lie and run off.

The problem with bringing such links into arguments like this is that no one does so for reasons of intellectual interest. For example, in this case, people aren't actually interested in the plight of the Uighurs.

That's you. That's not everybody though, only a sociopath would think it is, and it certainly isn't me. You use these people as welcome fig leaves to not own your own shit, and you lie through your teeth when it comes to manipulation on this site.

So fuck you and your supposed moral high horse.

Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Oh, I know what you mean.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17763554

people aren't actually interested in the plight of the Uighurs. Rather, it's convenient ammunition for justifying pre-existing political and national feelings.

Hardly anyone would say that to the face of someone who gets tortured, and nobody would say it while they get tortured.

For every Nazi who actually laid hand on anyone, there were hundreds or thousands of Nazis who "merely" looked the other way, with oh so flowery language.

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dx8rn0/absolutely...

Can't talk about that here, it all gets flagged like a brick, because hey, anyone who cares is just "virtue signalling". I mean, how the fuck could totalitarianism be important for any intellectuals? Just like no intellectuals wrote about the Nazis or Stalin, why would they, it was all just partisan dick waving contests.

https://twitter.com/arslan_hidayat/status/118550371514021478...

Imagine being in bed with something so horrible, you don't even dare to lift the covers. Congratulations, to all whom it may concern. May you live a long life, see interesting times, and all that jazz. All of it.

You realize that we are talking about Google, right?

The context is "disagreeing with unions", which wasn't further qualified.

edit: and certainly not restricted to Google. Just re-read chrisseaton's comment -- downvoting me doesn't change what's written here, it just adds the data point of dishonesty and underhanded tactics.

These examples are hilarious, but also a little insulting to employees who actually need unions.

How so?

So if a person from Europe starts to lecture you on guns in the USA, you're going to get a little defensive at their incorrect assumptions, even if you agree with their stance in general.

That is very much unlike, say, "defending all American gun laws to a T, without mentioning at all what you actually think, because they made you do it for being unfair or mistaken about something". And where that is the case, how you say things doesn't really matter, you won't get anyhwere either way. So you might as well be blunt, and if they want to correct something, let them. If they want to make excuses about being offended and not correct anything, it stands as is.

I know, because I get that all the time, when Americans say "Germany doesn't have freedom of speech" or such, because glorifying Nazism is illegal. I don't start pretending Germany is perfect in response to that, I quote them some basics about freedom of speech, stuff about American law and whatnot, and try to explain how there is no "totally unrestricted" free speech anywhere there is a listener. Then they always (no exceptions so far, probably because intelligent Americans don't even say "there is no freedom of speech in Germany" to begin with) drift off into nonsense or fall silent, because their brain seems to be unable to process what I'm telling them.

The fact that you can talk about that, while criticism of China gets shuffled off the front page EVEN on an American site, speaks volumes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dx8rn0/absolutely...

What would you say is the American equivalent to that? And what would be the American equivalent to this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d1rp31/are_we_rea...

And that is, all other actions considered, such a harmless and cute clip. Keeping it SFW.

https://www.facebook.com/MichaelYonFanPage/videos/9503534286...

How do you explain this?

You are not as immune as you think

You don't know what I think. Personally, I'm not even American, and have criticized the US for the stuff you mention more harshly than the average American by orders of magnitude. That doesn't mean I don't see the infinite difference between the US government sometimes sucking, and the CCP (== no elections, no free press, torture camps, putting down protests over the law being broken with force, dictating to companies what they may post in Western countries, and so on). Yeah, Snowden had to run, but we can talk about Snowden. There's American books by American publishers about American war crimes, Noam Chomsky leads a full, critical life. There's a greater risk that the Chinese government might kidnap or assassinate him, just for saying something they don't like in passing, than the US govt laying hand on him. So to even mention the CCP and the US in one sentence... again, I'm not even American, and even I know all that and more.

The only data point you're offering for what you think about the subject at hand is this "mirror check". Those are a dime a dozen, people pretending to be objective or neutral, and calling it a mirror check -- when the whole point of the exercise them getting away from their own personal stance and responsibility, while creating straw men up about a generic other.

"Leaked Files Expose How China Organized Mass Detentions of Muslims"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/16/world/asia/ch... / https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21552873

Welcome to HN, where that can get 40 points and yet not be found among the first hundreds of stories. Poof, gone like that, but not even a [flagged] tag. At this point, there's even CCP officials who are less committed than HN is: They leak stuff, you can't even discuss it.

https://twitter.com/austinramzy/status/1195688077731061760

The material was brought to light by a member of the Chinese political establishment who requested anonymity and expressed hope that the disclosure would prevent party leaders, including Xi Jinping, from escaping culpability for the mass detentions. There are nearly 200 pages of speeches by Xi Jinping, XJ party secretary Chen Quanguo and security boss Zhu Hailun. There’s another 150+ pages of directives and orders on controlling the Muslim population. I’ve reported on China since 2003, and can’t recall a leak like this.

It is stunning to hear party leaders in their own words ordering a drastic crackdown on extremism, including mass detentions, and the cold calculations with which they weigh the consequences. Chen redistributes Xi’s speeches after he goes to Xinjiang in 2016, and calls for a “smashing, obliterating offensive” and issues a vague order to “round up everyone who should be rounded up”. But perhaps the most telling document is a guide for officials to explain the camps to children of detainees. It is full of veiled threats, pseudomedical language of psychological infection and assurances the party will take care of you.

I automatically replace that with "the best place to work (for me) I know of". Someone who isn't into software or hardware but loves dancing might be very bored at Google, someone who loves animals might be happier as a vet, and people who enjoy organizing information and making it accessible to humans will probably be better off as a librarian, and so on.

Can people actually do that?

We're doing it right now, the top level parent comment was dead before I made my first reply to you.

Maybe the moderators could tell you why you can't vote if you emailed them?

HN could also have a feature that allows mods to communicate with users. I'm not going to use my main email anyway, and making a throwaway email for that is no more "community-like" -- it's just a hoop I don't see any reason for jumping through. Being transparent about moderating, and discussing such things in the open rather than behind closed doors, is a courtesy so basic for my sensibilities I won't beg for it from those who don't give it freely.

You are equating "telling a person to shut up and leave the discussion while allowing other people to keep attacking them in some way" with physically and forcefully removing them from the discussion, when it rather refers to a social expectation/demand of a group vs. an individual.

Such a signal is also sent by downvotes without argument, not to mention piling on to a downvoted or flagged comment (people can respond to response to a flagged comment just fine, and can agree with each other about how horrible the flagged person is or what else they probably advocate for, and all that stuff), while that person is rate limited if not shadowbanned.

I can't vote on comments anymore, neither positive nor negative. No clue why, it's been that way since a few months and I stopped caring, just like I wouldn't terribly mind "writing for the showdead community exclusively".

But I know that I upvoted comments that I found reasonable, and unfairly greyed out. So either I was manually selected for that, without any precedent or any communication, or there's an algorithm that blindly removes voting from people who don't agree with the herd enough. Either way, the people who haven't been on the wrong end of the stick much are always super quick to assume that means there's nothing shitty going on. But that has more to do with what people want to believe, not with actually looking into any of it.

What is the risk of talking about this? Why is this article pushed to page 2?

    32.  How we built Uber Engineering's highest query-per-second service using Go (2016) (162 points, 11 hours ago, 102 comments)
    33.  Google whistleblower: the medical data of millions of Americans is at risk (160 points, 2 hours ago, 45 comments)
Do you join me in my request to make all flags and votes on HN public?