oldmanjay

If it wasn't already clear, I don't really give much consideration to opinions of me formed via the internet.

I'm still not sure what you hope to actually accomplish, but I assume that like all trolls, you get a minor emotional boost from people taking you seriously, so you're welcome.

Did someone make a rule that everything needs to be a revolution?

I've been trying to convince myself that it's possible that some day people won't be tribalistic assholes constantly playing us v. them in situations that don't need it at all, and posts like yours leave me sad and shaking my head knowing it's way, way in the future.

Here's something I always wonder about humans; Why is it only groupthink when you disagree with it?

That wasn't the reason given for the dismissal. I'm not arguing anything in particular about soylent, and in fact I don't care about it at all. I'm just pointing out that personal standards are a boring emotional basis for deciding what is innovative.

No. I don't much care about your opinion of me, as is only appropriate.

What's not emotional about requiring products you have no hand in to meet your standards of innovation?

I'm far from taking it personally, so no need from my end.

What do you hope to accomplish with the antagonistic tone?

People like to use rhetoric to pretend that their opinion is universal as a preventative measure for suppressing disagreement. Programmers, unfortunately, like to apply this to things that are transparently subjective, targeted at an intelligent audience that often takes umbrage to being told what to think.

I feel like I should flag this article for being nothing more than rhetorical rabble-rousing[0], but frankly so many people have been arguing to let HN go to shit because that's the sort of comment community they want, so I'm more inclined to leave this particular cesspit bubbling.

[0] Here's the sort of logic the article employs: > There are ~ 19 million developers in the world. And Apple has managed to sell ~19 million Macs over the past 4 quarters. What a coincidence!

A possible reason you were initially downvoted is that your interpretation doesn't seem terribly likely because the team gives off no air of looking down on anyone.

Your edit sure won't help anything, the aggression is just uncalled for.

The vitriol you're bringing to this thread is far beyond what I'd expect considering the topic. What has angered you so greatly?

Fortunately for those of us who are interested in this, impressing you was never the point.

I would personally not be so eager to disclaim such impressive credentials, but I suppose you have your reasons.

Your dismissal is 100% emotional. Do you have any reasons that I should find it compelling or are you relying entirely on emotional resonance to make your anti-soylent case?

It's hard to say google invented either of those things with a straight face. Advanced the state of the art, certainly.

That doesn't really contradict the notion that rich people fund advances which end up enriching everyone's life, it just poorly expresses your envy about rich people having more than you.

Terrifying, horrifying, amazing... none of these words have any impact left after huffpo and buzzfeed have watered them down to meaninglessness. They get to join "evil" on the scrapheap of linguistic history.

I think the big distinguishing feature is that this is first-class support built into the platform, so it will likely have many more users than previous efforts. I don't anticipate it being generally useful until at least JDK11, though.

I've never met a European who wasn't as full of shit as anyone else. I suppose Belgians may be magical in that regard but I suspect not.

> I wonder, are there different groups of HN readers with different attitudes towards psychology?

Yes and no. Yes, we are all different people. No, there is not much sense to grouping us based on a single dimension. That is an excellent example of what Vonnegut called a granfalloon.

The "just" part doesn't make a lot of sense but otherwise it's a fair characterization

Perhaps in some comment to which I did not reply. The parent I am attached to had no such disclaimer but did explicitly say this is not worth a blog post.

Something that seems to escape most people who make fear-based assessments is that fear does not assist in thinking more clearly about situations.

There's a giant gap between your personal lack of interest and the notion that this blog post is something no one finds interesting.

Sure it does. People don't want to change their habits because of a hypothesized productive decline that is, by the necessity of not having tried the change, based solely on emotion. Call the emotion whatever you want if "fear" makes you feel too silly.

People often "feel" all sorts of rules that aren't real, then modify their behavior based on these unreal rules they've perceived, then harshly judge others for not living in the exact same dreamworld. I'm endlessly amused by it.

There is no particular reason to decide that your prejudices are the blessed ones

I'm reminded of all the people who think saying they'll leave the US if a given person is elected president is actually meaningful

Yes, I well understand that you and others are engaged in hand-wringing that has no real impact on anything. Hence my comment.

> Also, Panos Panay sounds like a genuine, authentic, passionate and knowledgeable whereas Jony Ive sounds like an Evangelical designer who feels "fake". I don't know how to explain it.

It's called "bias"