Hacker News Reader

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> Except you can find another group of holy men who disagree with that group.

This happens in your "western science" also (despite all the ability to "test" things), he he he...excuse me. Couldn't help it.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

Sure, the common man can belive one thing more than other. Does not mean that their actions are not based on belief in both cases...

Aren't you guys truly not getting this simple thing? I should probably get out of this thread..

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>Man is imperfect.

Yes

>The scientific method is a process that verifies...

And this process is done by imperfect men...who you end up trusting...

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

It is, because you can verify the claims of a holy man if you go meditate in a cave for a couple of decades.

Since no one is willing to do that, people used to accept their word for a fact. The same is the case with science claim that cannot be verified by common men who depend on them.

That they are also "believing", might be hard to get through the thick skull of these modern "science" gushers. They fail to see that "science" can be just a label, strapped to anything businesses wants to sell.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>The fact that things seem to work does not mean that they actually do work.

Well, the same can be applied to your "western science" as well..

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>Except when we test them, they don’t seem to work after all.

Have you heard about the replication crisis in your "western science"?

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

They can, but that wouldn't be too interesting to anyone in this universe. Or that it how I read it. Just like a being in a game wondering what caused the game company/programmer to write the game..

The reason will have no consequence to the beings in the game, and thus they will only be interested in the causuality mechanism within the game..

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>You fell into the trap of thinking that each person needs to verify each claim in order to put general trust in science.

I am not falling into any trap. Science and religion has its legit original purpose (religion was never meant to explain nature, though it does it as part of its own way of accomplishing its goals). But both are prone to exploitation by selfish entities, because of the need or requirement of laymans belief in the ir claims.

So ultimately, a religious claim and a scientific claim that cannot be realistically verified by 99.9 % of people are both similar, and both can end up casuing similar evils.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>what makes you trust your own perception when you verify scientific claims"

Because it is with my own perception that I sense the rest of the world with it. So that is all that one should care. Let me know if you don't get this. I ll elaborate..

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> I can predict which hospital will have better patient outcomes.

That is quite besided the point. The point being every patient who goes there believes the hospital us doing western blah blah blah...

Let me simplyfy it even more. The common mans dependence of "science" is based on beliefs. Just as it was on religion at an older time.

That scientific method is more trust worthy, does not make that dependence not based on belief. That is the weakest link in the chain, and that link is common to both science and religion.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> The claims of a holy man are not.

How come? The claims of holy men are verified by other holy men.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

Moving goalposts much?

> which are produced from them actually seem to work.

Oh yea, religeious things also seem to work. For example, prayers and other religeous offerings. That is how these things survive so long.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> who caused the universe is already out of bounds.

"caused" can mean a different thing. Imagine causualty in a 3d FPS video game, and the creation of the game itself. Though they are similar in semantics, one is different from the other.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

And if "people" are limited by resources, say if someone need an LHC to verify something..what really is the difference...?

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32621532

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

Tell me, how many scientific "claims" that you rely on a day to day basis, have you verified personally?

Or How many such claims can be verified with a single average person's limited resource?

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> it says contradicts science?

contradicting science is no great flaw. "Science" contradicts itself from time to time.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

> did the creator come to be..

Time, and causuality, is a construct inside of our universe. Asking who created the creator is like asking which way is down when you are in outer space..

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>Science is not a religion.

What is the difference between a holy man who claims to have the word of god, and a scientist who claims to have followed the "scientifc method"?

Modern human believes the latter. That is the difference.

tresqotheqon We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know

>But they are very very old tools and I don't think we need them anymore.

The societial problems that once solved by religion is worse than ever. It is true that current religions cannot solve it, because they have been "fact checked" out by the new religion of "science" with scientists as the new holymen, but that is a separate discussion.

The point is, we need a solution to those problems more than ever, but we truly cannot hope to find one.

tresqotheqon Ask HN: Boring but important tech no one is working on?

>attention span is short,

Fix that first. Because without that, education only serve to create decoys/rubber stamps/plants.

tresqotheqon The culture of rejection in computer science publications

I am a simple man. When ever I see the words "Toxic Culture" spoken by people somehere, I flee the country..

tresqotheqon The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

> But society is all about balancing the good and the bad.

Yes, but the "bad" tends to become "good", as the members of the society becomes weaker and weaker.

tresqotheqon The mental Universe (2005) [pdf]

> what are they made of?

The same stuff that all the stuff in your dreams are made of...

tresqotheqon Google refuses to reinstate account after man took medical images of son’s groin

>We should fight first for a proper legal recourse

It does not matter, because we don't have any fight left in us at all..

tresqotheqon Google refuses to reinstate account after man took medical images of son’s groin

>The only way for you to stay alive is to hike to lawless desert city of "Kowloon 2.1"

And this would be the best thing that ever happened to you.

tresqotheqon Scientists discover how mosquitoes can ‘sniff out’ humans

If you are gonna "what if", please "what if" mosquitoes as well...

tresqotheqon Scientists discover how mosquitoes can ‘sniff out’ humans

>Serious question, is there anything good about mosquitos?

Is there anything good about human beings? Have they done anything that is good for rest of the planet?

tresqotheqon Apple tells employees to work at the office three times per week starting Sept

> your air conditioned car..

I would rather drive the car through a beautiful landscape (that I pick), instead in rush hour trafic that I don't have a choice in..

>Then work in an amazing office..

That I did't choose...

>with fellow gifted engineers and civilized people.

That I didn't pick..

There is a poem in Malayalam with a portion that goes like this "Bhandura kaanjanakkotilanengilum bandhanam bandhanam thanne paaril". It means, "bondage is bondage even if you are in a golden cage".

So the point is that office work is vastly less freedom (thus a kind of oppression), even with all its perks (that is for the few that indeed have those perks).

tresqotheqon Apple tells employees to work at the office three times per week starting Sept

> had a pretty lax career.

Being common place does not negate the fact that it is indeed tyranny.