Hacker News Reader

Comment by dictum | Hacker News Reader

There are at least two possible arguments behind this question.

One (which, to be clear, is not how I interpret your comment) is the tired gotcha "if you hate society, why do you partake in it?", which is simply not substantial enough to answer.

The other argument I've seen is actually worth some thought, though I'm not ready to give a definitive answer in either this case or as a general principle:

Entities that play a certain game effectively endorse that game by playing it.

The devil lies in the corollary to that observation: whatever prizes are awarded by that game will only go to entities that are willing to play that game.

View on HN

> There are at least two possible arguments behind this question.

What was the question?

"Question" as used here is closer to "matter" or "problem" than to asking.

I just can't find the right word to describe a point raised about a paradoxical relationship. When I read it, I find an implicit question, though I cannot put to words the exact inquiry. Maybe "Why?"

In a way, all replies on a public forum are implicit questions. (This is where I get even more hand-wavy, sorry)

Corales are full of holes: _whoever knows the prizes and doesn't like the game can recreate them._

Worst case for the game-hater is play once and fork off.

Pointing out hypocrisy is now brushed off as a "tired gotcha". What a world we live in.

Pointing out hypocrisy by itself is not a virtuous action; it is a neutral vehicle for a deeper analysis of traditions, opinions, mores and values. This resulting analysis can then be virtuous or not.

In some debates, it is used as a quick way to endorse the status quo without having to analyse it further. A way to "win" a debate that shouldn't be won by either party.

Instead of debating the current practices or the proposed alternative approach on their own merits and circumstances, you first require that one of the participants (the one proposing a different approach) step down from the debate and only come back when the proposed approach is fully baked, working, and has all the optimizations of the current approach in place.

It ignores the differences between the two participants — be it background, power, money, skills, context, future commitments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com