Hacker News Reader

>I guess it makes them feel better about themselves to imagine the great majority of the population are rubes and they are some wise sage.

On the contrary, I identify with the article because I know how stupid I am.

I know how manipulatable I am. I know how easy it is to hijack by overclocked-monkey-brain instincts. I know how subject I am to addictive behavior. I know how far I am from my ideal self. I know how much vigilance it takes to get closer to that ideal self.

I know that I am barely conscious for most of my life. The decisions I make throughout the day are mostly automatic, governed by forces trained on habit rather than intention. To live deliberately is a nearly impossible struggle with the meager tools at our disposal, and I'd be the last person to fault anyone for not doing it, or even for not desiring to.

It is not contradictory to believe that capitalism is the most effective engine for driving human ambition towards useful goals, and at the same time, decry the perverse incentives it creates to manipulate people against their interests and to destroy the environment.

I believe that capitalism is the best way to optimize a civilization towards an objective function. I don't believe that that objective function is correct, particularly when the the people optimizing for it have the ability to change it (through brand advertising, government influence, etc.) We ignore the tragedy of the commons at our peril.

In addition, a person freely making a bad decision of their own volition is not moral insulation for offering them that bad decision in the first place.

"It is not contradictory to believe that capitalism is the most effective engine for driving human ambition towards useful goals, and at the same time, decry the perverse incentives it creates to manipulate people against their interests and to destroy the environment."

Extremely well put.

"manipulate people against their interests and to destroy the environment."

What system doesn't do this? If it's not a corporation manipulating people against their interests, it's the government.

"a person freely making a bad decision of their own volition is not moral insulation for offering them that bad decision in the first place."

If a person can't freely make a bad decision, it means they have less freedom. It's also interesting, because many "bad decisions" are subjective. Would you consider allowing a woman to have an abortion a bad decision? How about drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, or eating fatty foods?

All of these in one way or another are bad decisions, but I wouldn't want to be prevented from making them.

I don't think that it is the benefits of unbridled consumption that have people down. It is true that we live in a time that has amazing medicine, food, and communication.

The problem is that the oil, plastic, space for garbage, fertilizer for food, etc - the resources that our "amazing world" depends on - may not be unlimited. The depression sets in when you realize that with adequate foresight we could have enough amazing to get the benefits but without running our society into the ground; if only people had such foresight.

For most of the "conspiracy-nut losers" I think that your conjecture about the rubes and the sages makes sense. But for the thoughtful minority who believe in technology and consumption but also fear the excess of greedy monopolists, there is a real pearl of concern, it seems.

> We live in a time where the individual has more freedom to do what he wants with his life than ever before.

I'm not sure about that. Sure, we have infinitely more ways to work and play today, but freedom? I imagine that a US citizen from 200 years ago may be in awe of our advances in technology and medicine, but they'd likely be aghast by the erosion of our personal freedoms.

I wish I knew the source of the original shtick (it sounds like Paul Harvey), the one that goes something like this: Today's free man rises from bed, turns on his UL-approved lights, eats his USDA-stamped eggs and bacon for breakfast while watching his FCC-blessed TV, brushes his teeth with FDA-approved toothpaste, climbs into federal-safety-approved car with state-mandated insurance, to work at his OSHA-approved workplace, to get his state-taxed paycheck....

The original is so much more eloquent, but it certainly makes a farce out of the concept that any of us are truly free any more. Every facet of our daily lives is controlled by layers of regulation.

Heaven forbid you were a woman or black back then.

Furthermore, if you don't want to take advantage of regulations and consumer protections, you're more than welcome to raise your own damn pigs and build your own lamps in your home workshop.

As a 6th grader, I used to whip out my Swiss army knife to sharpen pencils in class, and as a young-adult I would pack that same knife onto airplanes.

Industry isn't the only thing that's more and more regulated anymore.

Mostly they just seem to get a kick out of criticizing how other people have chosen to live their lives.

Doesn't it make you sad that a huge number of people are unhealthy, unhappy, die prematurely from perfectly preventable reasons or just plainly do not have any slightest idea about what to do with their lives?

That's especially sad because it happens at the times when there are the most possible opportunities available to almost anyone.

Of course, I understand the common response - "but shouldn't they just live the lives they choose and who are you to tell them what to do with their lives".

This is reasonable and true, but I'm still sad for some reason.

I recognize the diversity of the human experience and I understand that not everybody would be happy living my ideal life. This respect for the choices of my fellow humans often puts me out of step with passionate idealists who feel contempt for folks who live in a manner outside their dogmatic parameters.

Living in Silicon Valley while growing up in the South East, being an Atheist and coming from a religious family, being a programmer and rubbing shoulders with MMA fighters and fans, and associating with Indians, Chinese, Europeans, Israelis, South Americans, and Africans in school has reduced my instinct to judge people who live according to systems of values different from mine. I guess I am broken in that way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm trying not to judge people too. I just find it incredibly hard to comprehend some things - how can people choose to not care about their health, their future etc.

On a conscious level I know that I should respect their choices, on a subconscious it just still doesn't make sense to me.

Which I think is the original article's point - we're living in what should be a time of plenty, but just having plenty isn't enough if you sacrifice everything else to get there.

You confuse criticism of freedom with criticism of stupidity. Some people just want higher standards of critical thinking. Is that so childishly anti-progress, or whatever you'd call someone like me, who thinks people should be maybe just a little smarter about what they consume? You come off as dogmatic yourself in defense of consumerism. Capitalism can still exist if people aren't stupid sheep, you know.

It also makes people do drugs. Such as frozen pizza.

I wonder what evolutionary psychology has to say about this phenomenon. Why is luxury so goddamn depressing?

It's the paradox of choice, as written about in many places. Give people many choices and many options and they will be, on average, less happy. Someone who assumes the only way to be is by being a subsistence farmer is not so unhappy.