The negativity on this site towards people who express any opinion beyond the herd is making this site a groupthink echo chamber. This karma system has failed.
It isn't accurate to describe HN as pro- or anti-Microsoft (or any $bigco or $bigtopic). It has a wide range of users who feel different things. The comment above isn't representative. Its indignation-to-information ratio was too high to be a good HN comment, though.
Totally agree. I've largely quit commenting here at all because of it. I always thought gross polarization of topics would never come to HN, but here we are.
And the result is that the comments are really of very little use anymore. Time was they used to be enlightening.
Too bad Paul Graham doesn't give a rat's ass. He has the opportunity to create something beneficial to world society here but doesn't care to put in the money and thought to figure out how to make it work.
So Microsoft has the chutzpah to create a github repository trying to dupe people into contributing enhancements to components of their for-profit spyware?
What if we all treated each other with respect and compassion?
What if creating happiness in others was our fundamental objective as individuals and societies?
Only with compassionate honesty can we root out the truly bad seeds and strip them of their power to harm others.
Without compassion as our basis, our prejudices blind us and lead to callous, destructive competition via blind ambition.
Only in compassionately equal cooperation can we determine which individuals and groups seek to oppress others, for cooperation is anathema to those filled with hatred and cruel self-superiority.
Our callous attitudes and systems of competition are destroying the Earth and inflicting misery upon the vast majority of humanity for the benefit of the few.
Committing oneself to become consumed by selfless compassion that motivates us to shape our societies into compassionate systems of mutual benefit and cooperation for ALL human beings is the ONLY path to happiness. Happiness for the individual begins in every interaction we have with each other and the Earth itself. The goal of that happiness is to spread this wisdom far and wide.
To achieve that ideal we must strip the cruel, hypocritical, hateful liars of their power to cause misery for others. And this unfettered capitalism must be tamed to serve everyone while allowing the ambitious to reap the benefits of their hard work.
Happiness is not pleasure and is so rare these days because very few people learn to selflessly, compassionately serve others' happiness. Worse yet, the most ruthless, amoral people have usurped the power structures of the world: governments, corporations and religious institutions.
Selfless compassion is the root of happiness and we much each hurry up and implement it because the evil bastards are running rampant over our precious, beautiful Earth and the vast sea of poors.
As with all things human, it is equally each our choice.
Fwiw, I think you've been downvoted because of the dissonance between being selflessly compassionate and being preoccupied with "cruel, hypocritical, hateful liars". Ultimately we're all the same, so if you really want to be selflessly compassionate, that should apply to those people you dislike, too.
Happiness is here today, you just have to find it in yourself.
The most ruthless people didn't usurp the power structures, they created them. Before they existed we had lawless anarchy.
We can live in harmony with the earth until a comet hits or a super volcano erupts at which point humanity goes extinct. To survive as a species we must continue to push technology forward as fast as we can. That's where capitalism, ambition and competition come into play. They are positive forces that are human's only path to long term survival.
The corporations have bought our governments and are destroying the environment for their short-term enrichment.
The obvious positives of technology and capitalism must be weighed against their long-term drawbacks. The unfettered capitalism the corporations have put into place via their lawyers and lobbyists has kept the negative outcomes from public view while shielding their owners from responsibility.
Boeing, Tanaka, Monsanto, Exxon, Facebook, ...
The system as it exists is far more destructive than constructive. Only a fool or a liar says otherwise.
ETA: So, "Civilization Accelerating Extinction at Unprecedented Pace" is not caused by technology, corporations and unfettered capitalism?
ETA2: And every civilization was created by the most ruthless? You only see yourself in everything you perceive, which is fundamental to ignorance.
The long term survival of humanity absolutely depends on technology. Aside from the existential threats I listed, all medicine, electricity, clean water... all depend on technological advancement.
I'll take Boeing and Facebook over plague, constant war and lack of rule of law any day of the week.
I'm not sure which period in time you're glamorizing to be much better than today, but the vast majority of humans alive in 2019 have a better life than the humans that came before them.
Humans will survive. There is far too much money to be made for the game to end. We will survive for centuries. It will get gorier and nastier, but we will stay alive at all costs.
Animals ... not so lucky.
The vast majority of living non-human mammals are livestock. They have never had it worse than they do today.
Wild mammals are now a minority and they have certainly never had it worse. They are in the midst of the Sixth Extinction.
Hopefully we survive a lot longer than centuries! That's not very long. We should be pushing for space exportation of the human race if we're actually to survive at cosmic scales.
> It will get gorier and nastier, but we will stay alive at all costs.
By nearly every metric, humans are better off today than they ever have been in the past. Why do you think this trend will not only stop but reverse itself? Technology is a great boon to humanity and it keeps getting better.
I think the welfare of non-domesticated mammals is an entirely different conversation to this one. I will say that evolution is always going to happen and there have been numerous mass extinction events in the past. Whether through astrological, geological or biological means, there will be black swans that greatly impact life on earth. Human culture is certainly among those.
I didn't say any previous time period was better than today; I said that our societies being created by the most ruthless is absurd, and it is. Humans at their best work cooperatively and it happens all the time and has happened at all times. But when power structures can be subverted by the amoral, they will be, have been, are being. That does not mean that structures that facilitate such power grabs were created by the amoral. To suggest so is plainly illogical and ridiculous.
We need to work in societies to prosper and survive, and cooperation is the best way to achieve that. Our failure is that, at larger scales, we have not applied the proper systems thinking to ensure that the ruthless and amoral cannot game the system for their own personal gain at the expense of the society and the Earth itself.
Those with power will always promote competition because they have all the advantages; as well, they will denigrate cooperation because their excesses will be seen for the unnecessary drain on resources they are. Thus, we have the corporate lawyers and lobbyists making the laws and regulations that are supposed to rein them in.
Can you give an example of a society you’re describing? One with power structures not “subverted by the amoral”? One that produced the positive vision of cooperation at scale that you say existed?
FDR seems like a very odd example of compassion based leadership. The US was literally killing millions of people under his watch and he setup the Manhattan project which culminated in dropping two atomic bombs. I won't even make a moral judgement on any of that, it just doesn't seem like an example of the a cooperative and peaceful society that you're talking about.
Yeah, you can stop calling me a fool. Like I said I'm not making any value judgments. If anything your example disproves your own point. The reality is that humans are not harmonious by nature at scale and the people in charge are always going to be powerful and practical ("amoral" in your terminology). If they weren't, the systems would collapse or be taken over by a competitor who is more effective.
Edit: we're done here. You obviously can't have an intelligent and respectful discussion.
He mentions in the Horizon "Fermat's Last Theorem" documentary that Taniyama was "not a careful person as a mathematician. He made a lot of mistakes, but he made mistakes in a good direction, so eventually he got [to] the right answer, and I tried to imitate him, but I found out that it is very difficult to make good mistakes." He says it with a wry grin.
The excellent Horizon documentary, "Fermat's Last Theorem", about Wiles' proof has some great interview footage with Shimura where he even discusses his sadness and being perplexed at Taniyama's sudden suicide.
When asked about Wiles' proof proving their conjecture, he quips with a sly grin: "Well, my first reaction was, 'I told you so.'"
Yeah, we have one (or maybe two?) at our local zoo and the setup is such that I was able to be eye-to-eye with one of them from less than two feet. That thing held my gaze with zero fear whatsoever of me. Unbelievable experience. It's a freakin' war machine. And strikingly beautiful as well.
No, happiness is the result of making others happy. Unhappiness is the same thing but for when you treat people badly. A person riding waves of happiness and unhappiness is doing so because they do not understand this fundamental reality of human existence and have not learned how to treat others accordingly.
We alone have free will and the Law of Karma (reaping what we sow in others) is the universe's feedback mechanism to nudge us away from animalistic competition at the expense of others and towards humanitarian cooperation for the benefit of one and all, no matter what their superficial differences.
To become consumed with universal compassion for all others and therefore be committed to helping create happiness in all those around us is to have become the owner of a deep abiding peace and happiness that cannot be shaken irrespective of external circumstances.
Becoming consumed by active, selfless love for all others is the zenith of human self-evolution and is the ultimate meaning of life. That so few understand this absolute truth is precisely why so many suffer and those who gain riches are left so very empty.
Which is the opposite of a "deep, abiding peace", would think it's more like a hole that can never be filled.. one might even call it a deep, abiding suffering from which people seek temporary refuge by hurting others.
Oh, so you say that. That's different, then, that totally negates anything I ever witnessed.
> doing the thing they enjoy most inflicting pain
I'm not going to insult your intelligence by listing known sadists and sociopaths with childhood trauma or brain damage -- from serial killers to Hitler, you name 'em... but do you know of examples where no damage could be found? I haven't even heard of that once, nowhere in pyschological literature. And all the truly happy people I've known have been kind. All the cruel people I've known are weak and never really at ease. Your "I say" isn't even a "in my experience", you can't even commit that much.
> I learned that it is the weak who are cruel, and that gentleness is to be expected only from the strong.
-- Leo Rosten
This matches my experience. It's not the argument, it's the summary of it.
Saints were usually not contented people. Quite the opposite. Everything I have ever read indicates they felt tormented by things like sexually explicit dreams. To be canonized and officially become a saint, you have to be a martyr, iirc.
There are people who get tortured by life and "do the right thing" -- do things the world admires as selfless, morally righteous etc. And then there are people who get tortured and decide to hurt others and blame it on what happened to them.
Some people simply are born without a conscience or sense of empathy, etc. Sometimes, they are raised by people able to help them understand that behaving badly will eventually come back to bite you and they manage to be decent people.
Sometimes they aren't.
I have raised two special needs children. I've read up on brain differences and other pertinent things. I have a child who has no innate sense of empathy or a conscience, etc. I was able to help him understand "What goes around, comes around. So if you want good people in your life long term, you need to treat them right."
In part because of that background, I have a tendency to attract young people who are wired differently. It has gotten me repeatedly burned. Being kind because they have a sob story has not helped these people become better people. They took advantage of my kindness and generosity. They had no plans whatsoever to treat me well because I had been good to them.
I also have a sob story. Most of the world has zero sympathy. It doesn't get me the kind of support these users have managed to get.
I don't fully understand that. Presumably, it's at least in part because I'm not enough of a user to run around playing the victim card.
I've also known people from cushy backgrounds who, by all accounts, have never seriously suffered in life. Instead of being kind, compassionate and loving people, they were selfish, lazy, impatient, thought everything should go their way with minimal effort on their part etc because that's how their life had always worked.
Good people are often people who have suffered terribly and took that as a lesson in having compassion for others. They aren't necessarily contented people. They aren't necessarily happy.
Plenty of people feel perfectly happy with treating other people badly and either justifying it as "Well, I was hurt first" or they simply expect it as their due in life.
I've known some really good people. I've also known at least one genuine sadist who intentionally fucked me over for shits and grins after I was incredibly kind, supportive and generous to them.
But I'm sure you don't actually want to debate this or talk about facts. Your mind is made up and will not be changed.
My mind was changed by first-hand experience with people who did not want to change. They enjoyed being cruel and had endless justifications for why they couldn't afford to change. But when push came to shove, the real reason is they don't want to change. They enjoy hurting other people and taking advantage of others helps provide them a much more materially comfortable life than I have ever had. And their comfort and personal pleasure is the only thing they care about.
Have a nice day. I don't intend to discuss this further with you.
You're not responding to anything I actually said, any view I hold, you are solely talking about what you incorrectly extrapolated from what I did say, and you don't even try to show how it would follow from what I said. You didn't even begin to discuss anything in earnest.
There are people who are incredibly shitty people with zero remorse who genuinely enjoy hurting others. They seem to count on people believing that they are miserable, they have a sob story, they need compassion and understanding because huge sob story etc while they intentionally and on purpose shit all over everyone around them.
They love it when people promote the kind of dumb ideas you are promoting because it helps them get away with figurative and possibly literal murder indefinitely.
At no point will they ever actually have any compassion for anyone else. They talk a lot about the importance of caring in order to manipulate fools into catering to their whims. They absolutely don't care about anyone at all except themselves, not for a single nanosecond. Their claims that they care are all entirely fabricated BS. They laugh up their sleeve that anyone believes this shit from them.
Promoting the idea that such people aren't truly happy is both clueless and enabling. It helps them keep victimizing everyone they interact with without negative consequences while they play the victim card, pretend to not know how to behave better due to an unfortunate childhood etc ad nauseum ad infinity.
Where does a lack of empathy or an inability to feel empathy come from? Oh, they're just "incredibly shitty" and that's that.
> Promoting the idea that such people aren't truly happy is both clueless and enabling.
You extrapolate so much from that. I also think Hitler wasn't truly happy, that doesn't mean I have more sympathy for him than for his victims. But I also wouldn't be shamed into unseeing what I see.
The adjective "clueless" doesn't move me at all, show, don't tell.
> It helps them keep victimizing everyone they interact with without negative consequences while they play the victim card
No, the victim card is what enables that. That they're deeply unhappy and getting a temporary fix by abusing others because at the core of their person is a howling, empty landscape, an abyss -- which, armchair simplification or not, is what I am talking about -- doesn't even come up.
There is a difference between happiness and pleasure and happiness requires no unhappiness to result in others. The only way a sadist can earn happiness is if they are only dealing with masochists and everyone is getting precisely what they want. But masochists do not want misery, they just enjoy the pain, which is as different from misery as happiness is from pleasure, though they may coincide.
Happiness is simply being happy (or, if you want, content and enjoying yourself).
If you do that by inflicting unhappiness, or by depriving others of things, etc, it's still happiness.
There's no part of the happiness definition that says it's incompatible to with "unhappiness to result in others". That might be part of Bhudism or Christianity etc, but it's not some given of human nature.
One can't be a Scotsman if one's ancestors don't come from Scotland.
There are things that are true because they fit the proper description and there are people who use "No True Scotsman" because they don't want to learn the truth.
People are free to misunderstand anything they choose, but words have meanings and reality can be accurately described using words with specific meanings.
[Editing because I can't reply for a while]: The dictionary writers are not the definitive masters of knowledge. What I am teaching here is (obviously) not only unknown to most people but actively denied by most.
Happiness is an internal upwelling of feeling. Pleasure is a physical sensation. They are not the same. That is why a person can be unhappy but still experience pleasure and why a person with poor life circumstances can still be happy.
Happiness:
a) a state of well-being and contentment
b) a pleasurable or satisfying experience
No where does it say that it comes from making others happy(which again, this is in itself illogical). Also, you claim many times that "sadistic pleasure" isn't happiness, but that clearly contradicts the second definition of happiness. You are free to misunderstand happiness as much as you like, but happiness has a meaning and trying to force definitions from your own universe down other people's throat and denying other's doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
>People are free to misunderstand anything they choose, but words have meanings and reality can be accurately described using words with specific meanings.
Words have commonly understood and dictionary meanings.
Not some meanings you or some other person with a strong opinion gives them.
And the standard meaning of happiness doesn't include "not inflicting pain to others" as a requisite.
>Happiness is an internal upwelling of feeling. Pleasure is a physical sensation. They are not the same.
That's just pseudo-profound hocus pocus.
In fact the nuance goes even deeper: if you think you have the upper moral superiority, you could even think you do good, and are totally justified to feel happy, while inflicting untold pain on others (e.g. if you're a Nazi supporter hunting Jews, which you think betters mankinds).
So, it's not just that you can be happy inflicting pain because you're sadist and enjoy it, but also because you think you do something very good and laudable by inflicting said pain!
And, a third possibility, is that you could very happy with "an internal upwelling of feeling" because you got what you want, and your personal life and relationships go great, while still inflicting tremendous pain, if it's to people you don't even care about, and never spend a moment thinking about them (e.g. you're a rich person with a perfect family life whose riches depend on your minions exploiting lower classes which you never personally meet, and could not care less about).
Dunning & Kruger's work is far from petty; I merely gave him a dose of his own "How's that for nuance" attitude. He is wrong and his confidence is perfectely explained by D&K's groundbreaking work.
I stated you resorted to pettiness. Nothing to do with the work of anything you referenced. It seems like you’re being purposefully oblivious to this. As it was very obvious Dunning wasn’t what the pettiness was aimed at. Further showing your [lack of] candor
It seems a lot of people don’t get your point of view, but I think you’re spot on. You only get what you give, etc. In fact, I’d say this almost goes with that article the other day about how to be successful, and the big takeaway was to be a genuinely pleasant person. If nothing else, spreading good “karma”, being pleasant, and building a momentum of it can help to breed happiness and success.
Because our Creator is the ultimate loner, utterly peerless, absolutely Unfathomable. We alone can choose to contemplate It and Its incredible Majesty, and we, as creatures, can only grasp tiny aspects of its Being.
It would prefer that we choose to live humanely, deciding to rise above our animal potential to create happiness for others, so that more of us have the peace and time to contemplate this beautiful creation.
I am curious why you're convinced that Karma is a "universal" law. Your ideaology is interesting and good-willed but I don't think the universe gives a shit about karma.
Let's say that, before Einstein and Boltzman, physicists thought they understood how the world worked but not only did those two expand our understanding to a much deeper level, very few of their peers acknowledged the truth for decades.
I am convinced because I know the truth. Beyond that, it is the only explanation for happiness and unhappiness because it is the only truth of how this world works. As quantum physics underlies all of creation, there are some truths one must experience to understand; i.e. we must each 'open the box and see' ourselves.
We are the only creatures in this plane with free will and the price of that free will is learning how to use it in cooperation with our fellow human beings for the happiness of one and all. It is the design of the universe. If we had adopted this attitude as a human race we would not be mindlessly destroying our Earth's environment for immediate gratification.
Perhaps two trillion galaxies with a couple of hundred billion stars in each, our universe's point-source Big Bang origin has been confirmed by theory and the measurable remnants of that explosion, called the cosmic microwave background radiation. And yet there is no Creator? Not only is not scientific, the truth of our having a Creator is the only explanation that makes logical sense.
We are each made to directly interface with our Creator via the information system that underlies this universe in order that we can learn how to live happier lives, yet we are completely free to choose to ignore this fact, as our free will is absolutely freely given. There are many fools who deny this reality while failing basic science by having never made that inward journey; I tell you that this is possible and they would call me the fool, yet they can offer no understanding of this universe and our purpose of human life: to be happy by helping ALL others be happy, too.
"The Way goes in." --Rumi
Einstein proved Boltzman correct but it was years before Einstein was accepted. And so I am downvoted by the legions of closed-minded materialists present on this site. Alas, they don't know happiness and only increase their unhappiness by fighting this Sufi Message of Love. It is up to each individual to make that connection for themselves. We are each both the experiment and the performer of the experiment. To be consumed by love with our Creator's help is the goal and the purpose can be stated with one line: "On Earth as it is in Heaven." That purpose is the same across all forms of religion, though hypocritical liars are also present in all such forms. There are also those of us in each of them that are attempting to be consumed by love for ALL our fellow human beings, irrespective of their path. We are the Sufis.
Happiness is not the same thing as pleasure. Happiness comes from within and is unrelated to external circumstances. Pleasure is a purely physical feeling and there are certainly people who take pleasure in other people's misery.
That is not happiness, it is sadistic pleasure and it only increases their unhappiness.
[Editing because I can't make a new reply for a while]:
Happiness is an upwelling feeling in our being. Pleasure is a purely physical sensation. Sure, they may happen together but they may also happen in apparent contradiction. That is why the sadist who likes taking pleasure in creating misery in non-masochists is doing so to while increasing their eventual unhappiness, and also why people in difficult circumstances can still experience sublime happiness.
The key is that the Law of Karma has a cause-and-effect relationship in time ("you reap what you sow"). It's like getting drunk and then having a hangover for those who sow unhappiness in others, while creating happiness in others is like a drug with no negative after effects.
This is why you will never see Trump truly smile as he can only fake it: he has ripped off everyone he could, used his powerful lawyers to keep from being held accountable, cheated on all of his wives, skeeved on Miss Universe pageant contestants by walking though their dressing room, lied any time he thought he could gain from them, and belittled every person around him for his own narcisistic pleasure. When you see him in a relaxed, introspective moment, his life of creating misery for everyone around him shows as plain as the sun at high noon on his face.
Ok going by your definition, there are people who experience the same upwelling feeling, when they make others suffer.
Or you are just saying this people doesn't exist ? Or they are just lying and somehow you know better then themselves regarding what they feel or experience ?
>No, happiness is the result of making others happy.
By your own definition, you can't make others happy. Because, again by your own definition, for them to be happy, they need to make someone else happy, but for that someone to be happy, he needs to make an other person happy etc... A never ending chain. Your definition is illogical.
That's a really nice try. I'm sorry no one has ever told you a joke that made you laugh or treated you with concern and kindness when you were down or gave you a gift.
The chain only ends when one link is left unconnected to another. That is why happiness only to the extent that people keep creating it from whole cloth. It is our choice.
Every compassionate act creates happiness in the receiver and then the feedback loop creates it in the giver. Once a person has tasted enough such transactions, that is all one wants.
Mock congratulations to you, my fellow traveler! You are just like Trump. That is not a good thing.
Choose to spread light and love to one and all and reap the benefits of that sowing! Or choose to live in shallow animalistic competitive selfishness and experience their brutish life in the company of callous alpha-seeking pack members who will have you so long as you keep your place or provide value for their worldly pursuits, ever ready to take you down a peg and show you the door.
Me, I'd rather hang out with the likes of Louis Armstrong. "Love baby, love. Yeaaaaaaaah."
When one strives for the happiness of others one has fulfilled the greatest purpose in life and the reward is a deep abiding peace and happiness, regardless of circumstance.
All it costs is your entire life and the scorn of your fellow man who are mostly embroiled in the seeking of pleasures and therefore know not happiness.
Freedom is our fundamental human right, self-determination is limited by material means, and dignity is knowing that you seek to both understand and embody the highest ideals.
But sacrificing the freedom to cause misery to others? What a small price to pay.
