"If philosophy improves your thinking, Azn, then you obviously have not read enough of it. Being rude, nasty and insulting in exchange for earnest effort to understand is not the mark of an improved mind."
The conception of the overman is based on an ideal of total freedom: nothing constrains or controls the overman but himself, so he is the creator of his entire universe. Here is what Torvalds, the creator and overlord of Linux told a developer on his mailing list: "Mauro, SHUT THE F--- UP! ... Shut up, Mauro. And I don't _ever_ want to hear that kind of obvious garbage and idiocy from a kernel maintainer again. Seriously. ... Fix your f---ing "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken. And fix your approach to kernel programming." Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/geekess-calls-linus-torvalds-out-for-rants-2013-7 He called Sharp's call for civility "Bullshit." Bullshit. The thing is, the "victim card" is exactly about trying to enforce your particular expectations on others, and trying to do so in a very particular way. It's the old "think of the children" argument. And it's bogus. Calling things "professional" is just more of the same - trying to enforce some kind of convention on others by trying to claim that it's the only acceptable way. [ Since you seem to want to keep this in public, I'll just cut-and-paste from my reply, so you have already seen this part of my argument, it's only slightly edited because now I'm no longer typing on my cellphone ] The thing is, different people act and react differently. On both sides. And I think we should recognize that and also *allow* for that. And sometimes it means, for example, that people interact primarily with certain people that they like more - because they are a better "fit". I think we actually do it very naturally, simply because we are human, and this is how people interact in real life too. Sometimes we do it consciously - the way we have people at various companies that act as go-betweens - but most of the time we do it just because humans are all about social interactions and we don't even think about what we do and why. For example, you work mostly through Greg. I don't think either of you *planned* it that way, but it's likely because you guys work well together. See what I'm saying? People are different. I'm not polite, and I get upset easily but generally don't hold a grudge - I have these explosive emails. And that works well for some people. And it probably doesn't work well with you. And you know what? That's fine. Not everybody had to get along or work well with each other. But the fact that it doesn't work with you doesn't make it "wrong". This isn't all that different from working around language issues etc by having certain people work as in-betweens on that front. And where we differ is in thinking either side has to necessarily change. You think people need to act "nicer". While I think it's *natural* that people have different behavior - and different expectations. We all have issues somewhere and don't all like each other. There are certain people I refuse to work with, for example. They may be good engineers, but they just aren't people I can work with. And hey, I don't actually think we've personally even had any problems. And I realize that you may react very strongly and get nervous about us having problems, but realistically, do you actually expect to like all the other kernel engineers? And equally importantly, not everybody has to like you, or necessarily think they have to be liked by you. OK? So as far as I'm concerned, the discussion is about "how to work together DESPITE people being different". Not about trying to make everybody please each other. Because I can pretty much guarantee that I'll continue cursing. To me, the discussion would be about how to work together despite these kinds of cultural differences, not about "how do we make everybody nice and sing songs sound the campfire" Do you think you might be interested in *that* kind of discussion instead of the "you are abusing me" kind of discussion? Because if you want me to "act professional", I can tell you that I'm not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearign a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm *also* not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways. Linus On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:01 PM, just camel <[email protected]> wrote: > ... said the libertarian responsible for structural violence to the > megalomaniac responsible for verbal violence. ;-) Maybe one of the first > things an AGI system will do is to create personalized experiences for > everybody to improve their thinking/consciousness? But then again the > fearful/ignorant will probably interpret those experiences in > non-productive ways just like they do today? The crux of free will ... > > > On 04/06/2014 11:48 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> If philosophy improves your thinking, Azn, then you obviously have not >> read enough of it. >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10514698-9a8cda1e > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/ > member/?& > > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
