HN user

Sagat

184 karma

my website: personaljokes.com

contact me at: jeremy.ben.taleb@jourrapide.com

Posts3
Comments146
View on HN

Be careful when trying to untangle correlation and causation: it may well be that poor people and criminals are more likely to turn to religion. After all, atheism is mainly found in more educated populations.

Sorry, if you are not putting your life on the line, you do not deserve to call yourself a "warrior" or any other term which implies duty and honor.

they did not have the same chance to develop an ethic framework as adults had, because they had less years to learn.

Many people die without ever having found an ethical framework. In fact, it's possible to make ill-designed ethical frameworks of your own that can have disastrous effects on society. Believing that time is the equivalent of wisdom is unwise.

There are a number of alarming studies (as some other poster said, take a look at N. Carr's book) that show that screen time, especially in our formative years can have dramatically negative effects on brain development. So it's possible that some people who ended up zombified by the internet could actually have had significant lives. There are plenty of people whose otherwise adjusted lives have spiralled into failure due to drugs, so why couldn't the same thing happen with other dopamine releasing activities? I think the fact that people have literally died from screen overuse lends credence to the idea that there is some danger to integrating computers in every part of our lives and it's not necessarily our fault if we fall into the depths of online time-wasting.

In any case, I don't really like the idea that those people would been useless anyway as if it were in their nature to be unmotivated. Maybe I'm a bit naive but I believe good nurture can offset much of the problems of nature.

1. Those are all allegations. In fact, the whole DSK mess is extremely unclear and the case presented against him is highly suspicious, although it is clear that he is a bit seedy. Some believe it to be a political machination for a number of reasons.

2. One politician's behavior means ALL politicians of that country behave wrongly?

It's true that most people don't care about most things since they operate inside a small, simple world without being concerned with the things outside of their immediate experience. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing; many individuals have gone insane trying to solve the problems of the world. I myself only want a quiet life without hassle.

Societal and technological change are the result of the work of a small minority, which may very roughly correspond to the 20/80 Pareto principle. You can't expect everyone to be involved in complex conundrums. So it doesn't matter if the majority don't care about an issue. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do something about it.

I have trouble taking psychology and psychiatry seriously. They are the softest of the sciences and mostly based on cultural norms anyway. Consider the fact that homosexuality was labelled a mental disorder in the DSM not long ago. This is evidence that they make it up as they go along.

France isn't really that open minded about sex. Although most people are secular, you still have the whole judaeo-christian morals hanging around in the background, subtly changing everybody's behavior. Eh ouais.

The problem is that not everyone is making less progeny. Japanese and European populations may be in decline, but African, Asian, Arabic, and Hispanic ones are growing at a brisk pace.

So yes, it's pretty bad for some people to limit births. You are essentially diminishing your influence and putting yourself at risk of being swallowed up by other cultures.