Comment by cantrevealname | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cantrevealname | Hacker News Reader

Apropos of the link, there is a famous paperback book literally named "Steal This Book" written by 1960's counterculture activist Abbie Hoffman.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steal_this_book

Booksellers (who dared sell it) typically kept it behind the counter since the intended audience did steal it.

The antics of Abbie Hoffman were legendary: He once brought the New York Stock Exchange to a halt for several minutes when he threw hundreds of $1 bills from the visitors gallery onto the NYSE trading floor, and all the brokers scurried around grabbing the money. The gallery was separated from the trading floor by bullet-proof glass shortly after his visit.

The book is chock full of hacking techniques, by which I mean using systems (subways, payphones, shelter, society, politics) in unexpected ways. Contrary to popular belief, the content of the book is mostly legal things one can do to live for free.

Reflecting the times, Hoffman's politics are very socialist, not libertarian. However, the book would be well appreciated by HN readers. I'm sure there are free copies easily found on the web.

I also thought it would be about Abbie Hoffman's book. I read it in highschool just after Jerry Rubin's Do It!, because Rubin talks about Hoffman's book in his own. To this day Do It! is still my favorite book, and Steal This Book is close to second. It was my first encounter with what I naturally called "hacking" outside of the computer field.

Many HNers are socialist. Libertarianism is common among the younger ones.

That's because they don't know any better.

Any theories as to why? Whatever the truth is, it's even more important to understand why something is a certain way.

I put it down to experience. It sounds great, until you actually try to live it for a lengthy period. Ayn Rand, after all, eventually collected social security.

The argument being that Ayn Rand paid into social security, and was therefore entitled.

Was she a hypocrite for buying from state-run food depots when she lived in the Soviet Union, as well? Are free market advocates now obligated to starve themselves before taking money out of a system they were forced to pay into? That's quite a stacked deck of cards you're arguing with.

Observable reality and pointing out logical inconsistencies (hypocrisy) are generally considered fair game.

Truisms that assume the very thing under debate are generally considered not useful in moving a discussion forward.

According to The Fountainhead, yes!

Ayn Rand was not a Libertarian.

A few guesses as to factors:

1. Some prominent people are libertarians, and outspoken about it (Peter Thiel, Jeff Bezos, Eric Raymond, etc.), so the ideas are circulating in the community.

2. This part of the economy is doing well, and as a result techies have little personal incentive to support any alternatives to free-marketeering. We generally have options and can get away with telling our employers where to stick it, if we don't like their policies, without the result being poverty. Being in an "employees' market" where we have substantial leverage insulates us from many of the less enjoyable aspects of market economics. In a few situations where this doesn't hold, e.g. the issue around health insurance for small startups in the U.S., I think you do see considerable defection from the otherwise pro-market views (health reform was popular in the Valley).

I like your ambiguous use of 'they'. :)

Some of us are liberaltarians.

I doubt age has much to do with it. The tech industry tends to lean libertarian to a greater degree than the population-at-large in general. Or at least that's been my observation.

Of course, as a 40 year old Libertarian, I may be a bit biased.

Agreed. Age has less to so with it than the tech worker's self identity, which is that they know better than everybody else--including the government. It's a common belief among people with IQs between average and genius, if a bit sophomoric.

That's not the entire picture though. I mean, regarding "techno libertarian" types, that could be part of it. But regarding Libertarians in general, it's not about knowing more than everybody else (I for one freely acknowledge than plenty of people know more about plenty of things, than I do), but rather the principle of being free to make choices - even bad ones. Freedom from the use of aggressive / coercive force, is it's own end, to Libertarians.

Even IF the use of that force would be to prevent me from making a bad choice, it's still wrong. Outside of economic arguments which are largely rooted in the Austrian School, that is the mindset that defines Libertarianism.

Now, as it happens, I will argue that, in many, many case, I do "know better", regarding things that pertain spefically to me. And that may be a bit of conceit, and that conceit is probably common to many Libertarians and is probably the essence of your statement above. But I would be a Libertarian whether or not that was the case.

I was thinking of the book "Steal this Computer Book" about hacking on the web: http://www.amazon.com/Steal-This-Computer-Book-4-0/dp/159327...

Here: http://bit.ly/1dW5hyN

Obfuscated link goes to http://api.ning.com/files/4Xa2-CEC7u86knA5OklTwPaFKUN5km1ZQd...

This book has a yogurt recipe! I'm glad that is still legal. But, some things aren't really legal, like stealing food off the delivery guy's car.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com