Comment by wiseowise | Hacker News Reader

Comment by wiseowise | Hacker News Reader

A lot leaps from riflemen, who obviously didn’t want to die (did you expect them to rush Medal of Honor style?), to system features to model office work? Whole essay is incoherent mess written by one of those lonesome “no-bullshiter” who gets the job done but is so pulled down by modern day bureaucracy that even his clairvoyance can’t get through.

> Dostoevsky wrote _The Brothers Karamazov_ alone. The Apollo Guidance Computer came from a team at MIT small enough to have real ownership, hierarchical enough that Margaret Hamilton's name could go on the error-detection routines she personally designed

I have good news for you, my jaded friend! What is similar between those people and you? You’re an individual! Therefore you could write another masterpiece yourself, you can be next Notch, next copyparty guy, next Stardew Valley guy and a long list of creations created by an actuallly high-performing individual, not some complainer who is oh so encumbered by stupid social dancing.

> A lot leaps from riflemen, who obviously didn’t want to die

Yeah but you'd think not dying involves killing those who want to kill you, or at least shooting at them! Isn't it super interesting to learn that 80% of riflemen don't ever shoot?

a) other comment in the thread disproved the claim

b) even if it was remotely true, context matters. Refusing to shoot someone point blank because of reasons is one thing, refusing to go against Tiger 2 is another.

Yes, but that's also why the claim isn't true and has been criticized for years. It is so much more instinctive to simply pull the trigger even in a panic than sit there and do nothing.

In a gunfight, you usually have to expose yourself at least a little bit in order to aim and fire. And let's say that you know an enemy soldier is around some corner, unaware, and you can pop out and shoot them. If there is another soldier aiming at your position, unbeknownst to you, you are dead.

In WW2 most shooting was covering fire, not targeted shots. That means people where not aiming shots, but just firing in the general direction of the enemy. If the 80% would have done it, the positive would be the other 20% would have been much more effective with the only downside of increased ammo consumption.

You seem to ignore all the mountains of evidence that sense of responsibility drops in groups. The larger the group, the bigger the drop. This is not news, or non-sense.

Are you a C level at some company? If not, why do you care?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com