Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
Love the capitalization of “Variant of Concern”
Different people communicate differently. The Western white cisheteronormative patriarchal way is not the only way to communicate peace and love. When will the bigots understand this?? smh
@MentalCasanova @michaelmalice
But it’s in Mexico… which has a government.
Has anarchy ever been tried? Ziki-sama writes like it has.
When one realizes that a project is not fun, one shouldn't push through to the end. Doing so anyway is a mistake children are forced to learn in school. It's not a skill—it's the lack thereof: blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/the-true…
Children are very good at dropping projects when they're not fun anymore. It shouldn't be surprising that they finish fewer projects than they start: one can't always know in advance, without trying, whether one will like doing something. Finding out is part of the fun.
Lots more citations and lots less uptalk needed. 😂
Ich (Hesse) kenne und verwende den zweiten aber nicht den ersten Sinn.
RT @Proteometheus:
@lporiginalg
It's true, under socialism everyone is equally fucked
She's "a contributor to the field of postsocialist gender studies" (Wikipedia). Checks out.
I didn’t put words into your tweets. Or do you have a specific quote?
Also, really, you blocked me? twitter.com/StefanoPortogh…
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
I’ll talk about whatever I want. I can ascribe violence to the state without you taking it personally. Just read my tweets slowly and soberly and don’t read things into them I didn’t say.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
Good. But you realize that the state steals money at the threat of murder from rich (and also poor!) people all the time, even when they made their money honestly and legally?
Again, I didn’t claim you’d would want to steal from them. I don’t know why you’re taking all this so personally.
Okay, then publicly share your tax return from last year so others can make sure you didn’t make your money dishonestly. Feel free to link to it in your response.
Guilt can’t be inherited. You cannot be blamed for your ancestors’ mistakes.
And how far are you willing to go against peaceful people who do no want to “repay”?
And that makes it okay to steal it from them? Is that what you’re saying?
And what gives you the right to look into how others made their money anyway?
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
No? Then what do you think the state should do about those pesky rich white people who’d like to keep their money?
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
I didn’t put the word “violence” in your tweets, no. I only described how the government acts. I ascribed that to the state, not you. I used the word “state”.
No, I’m not hurt. I’m just saying you shouldn’t spend other people’s money. Or worse, have the government do it for you.
If people were forced to pay reparations because they’re white.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
This despite having offered multiple ways you could change my mind. You have offered none.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You haven’t refuted my arguments so I don’t see why they’re false. I’ve offered many refutations of your arguments which you’ve ignored. Now you lie by claiming great respect for me but accusing me of having a big ego and looking down on me by feeling sorry for me. In one tweet!
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
Redistribution of wealth means the state violently acquires wealth. It must be violent because like you said, some wealthy people don’t want to pay. Violent acquisition of another’s wealth is a form of exploitation, which you wanted to avoid. Hence the contradiction.
Assuming your historical claim is correct that healthcare today is financed by past slavery (which I don’t think it is) does not mean slavery is the only possible way to finance healthcare. It just doesn’t follow. Yet you keep saying that.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You’re repeating a point I’ve long acknowledged and stated I have understood. I don’t know why you keep laboring it. I don’t think you’re actually trying to understand my arguments.
That’s not what I called racist.
so what
So people shouldn’t be forced to pay for others’ mistakes!
If you’re eager to give black people money, stop talking about it and just do it. And keep your hands out of others’ wallets.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Why wouldn't some white people living in western countries not be related to past white slaves owners ?
Because not all white ancestors were slave holders. Also you had just claimed that people who look alike aren’t necessarily related.
I understand what you’re saying. You’re still conflating historical claims with claims about possibility and impossibility. Can you not conceive of a world where slavery never happened yet people still have healthcare? Couldn’t they have found another way to create that wealth?
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You say wealth is bad when 1) it’s gotten through exploitation and 2) when it isn’t equally distributed.
How do you suggest we fix 2)?
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You could change my mind by naming some law of nature (evolution isn’t one) that dictates that health care can only be afforded through slavery. Or potentially by refuting Tom’s and my arguments that slave holders were worse off for keeping slaves.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You wrote about compensating “ancestors of slaves” so I’m just clarifying.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
Please slow down and read my previous tweet again. I asked what could change your mind, not for more arguments why you’re right.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
Your tweet contradicts itself. Can you see why?
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi
You mean descendants of slaves?
That wasn’t your claim. You said healthcare “is only possible (!) because of past slavery”. You’re conflating historical claims with statements about what’s possible and what isn’t.
@SPortoghesi @StefanoPortogh1 @DavidDeutschOxf
Right, just like white people today aren’t necessarily related to previous slave holders, yet they’d be forced to pay reparations anyway for being white. Which is racist and gross.
@StefanoPortogh1 @tomhyde_ @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
It seems to me that you keep repeating your assertions despite criticism. What could convince you that you're wrong about, say, slavery having built the West and healthcare not being possible without slavery?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
I think the "Therefore" is false.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
"I can't get over the idea of A apologizing for what B did. Even when they're contemporaries, much less when one is dead and the other's alive. Scalia [...] was saying 'I owe no man anything because people who looked like me did something to people who looked like him.'"
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
On the notion of today's Americans paying for their slaveholder ancestors's sins—as a justification for systematic theft from Americans, and as if that wouldn't create resentment and more poverty, btw—Thomas Sowell said:
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
if we today are free from worries about hunger and our heath care needs this is only possible because of past slavery
This is simply a false (and unargued) claim. Are there laws of nature that mandate that health care can only be financed through past slavery? Outlandish!
@tomhyde_ @StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Amazing that the people who argue against this position implicitly argue in favor of slavery. Unless they also argue that wealth is bad—which, in due course, they do.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Isn't evolution more about replicators spreading better than their variants?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Who else is in that exalted category of people whose genes contain the moral truth about our treatment of animals?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
The question wasn't whether there are laws of nature, it was whether there are laws of nature that would have prevented people from realizing that voluntary cooperation would be preferable over slavery.
I recommend posting comments as children, not siblings. Easier to follow.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
We don't owe our ancestors anything. And so you've changed your mind on wealth only being good when it's equally distributed? And how would that follow from that debt of gratitude btw?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
No, I'm not trying to justify slavery. And as I have said, a good case can be made that we would be wealthier today had slavery not been a thing and had people cooperated voluntarily instead. Again, problems are soluble. They are now and they were then.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Slave owners would have realized that control over others is a bad thing had they had the requisite knowledge. And slaves would not have run off to "their african motherland" had society known how to cooperate peacefully.
Are there laws of nature that prevented this?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Oh, I see, you have two accounts.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
You're making it sound like I said that slaves wanted to be slaves. I didn't.
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
Ah, and so we should pay the price for our ancestors' sins and elect Robin Hoods who forcefully take money from those evil rich people and give it to the innocent poor?
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
I don't need to prove that because again, theories can't be proven.
Isn't your claim that wealth could not have been built without slavery a bit ironic, given that until a minute ago you had "BLM ✊" in your bio? Unless you think wealth is bad...
@StefanoPortogh1 @SPortoghesi @DavidDeutschOxf
People don't always do what's in their best interest.
Slave owners could have saved money through voluntary cooperation because they wouldn't have had to house and feed slaves and keep them moderately healthy. Learned this from @tomhyde_
either something is forbidden by the laws of nature, or it is achievable, given the right knowledge. It's doubtful that not having slavery in the 1800s would have been against the laws of nature, don't you think?
Btw theories can’t be proven true anyway (Popper).
I have explained how that wealth could have been built without slavery:
People could have gotten wealthier without slavery back then too if they had known how.
For more background, I refer you to Deutsch's 'momentous dichotomy':
Also schools could ask children if they consented to being sent to school, and if not, help them defend themselves against their tyrannical parents. And these efforts could be funded voluntarily through donations.
I suppose in principle parents could always coerce their children if they really wanted to, but the cost of doing that could be raised to such a level that they wouldn't want to. That requires a change in culture, I think.
Although slavery was a thing, it seems to me the vast majority of wealth was historically created, as today, through voluntary cooperation, not coercion, because the latter is much more efficient and peaceful and positive sum.
I didn’t make a historical claim. It’s an epistemological one, which, if true, is true at all times. People could have gotten wealthier without slavery back then too if they had known how. (And some have argued convincingly that being a slave holder made one poorer.)
Nobody should be obligated to help others.
I think for some children coercion at home is greater than at school. In some cases, however, that can be a result of school: parents forcing their children to do homework, study, spend less time doing what they enjoy, etc.
RT @M_T_Franz:
#CovidTest Es steckt ja eine gewisse Demütigung des Bürgers dahinter, wenn man ihm dauernd von Amts Wege mit Stäbchen in den…
@LifeMdcrDIAgnt @AstronomydaiIy
Why would we be insignificant?
RT @Anthea06274890:
Shooting at Oakland CA Juneteenth celebrations last night, leave 1 dead and 5 injured. This is how people reacted when…
I've been saying from the start of the pandemic that one (of the few) silver linings is the reduced coercion imposed on kids. (That's assuming the coercion in school is in fact greater than the coercion at home.) twitter.com/LPNH/status/14…
I suppose “confirmed” is a little better than “proven”. But when will science communicators pick up Popper’s “corroborated”? twitter.com/SPACEdotcom/st…
Problems are soluble. Society is not a zero-sum game. People can be free without enslaving others.
@__adamjohnson_
We shouldn’t so much care about that notion of logically when talking about physical theories
Brains are physical. Brains in vats, even when running AGIs, are not universal constructors.
@__adamjohnson_
But yeah if an AGI is tractably programmable within Minecraft and gets a suitable body then I suppose the answer to my original question is "yes".
@__adamjohnson_
I think it's technically possible to create an AGI within Minecraft since one can build universal computers within Minecraft, but I'm not sure how easily those computers are programmed. I'm too much of a noob to the game to know for now.
@__adamjohnson_
It will need outputs to interact with the Minecraft world around it.
@__adamjohnson_
Morals or not, it doesn't change that logically the "so" in step 3 is false.
A universal constructor can transform anything into anything that the laws of physics allow, yes.
I want to build a machine in Minecraft that can transform anything into anything that the laws of Minecraft allow.
RT @CasuallyGreg:
This looks like a Sunday worship. What the hell is wrong with these people?
https://t.co/X2embUNXbt
@__adamjohnson_
Brain in a vat by definition doesn't have any outputs so it couldn't persuade others to do things.
You're saying the player within Minecraft is already a universal constructor?
Or, if you don't have Instagram and can't open that link, here's another example (albeit much less impressive): youtube.com/watch?v=OKhdHk…
Here’s an example of automated transformations in Minecraft:
Well they're all made of these "blocks" which, within the game, could be considered physical. And I believe on some level of emergence physicality has to be a given for construction, otherwise you can't make the blocks that make the blocks that make the blocks...
@__adamjohnson_
The "so" in step 3 is false because AGIs are only universal constructors when they have suitable hardware. E.g. a brain/mind in a vat is an AGI but not a universal constructor.
From what I understand you can set up blocks such that they cause certain transformations (I've seen videos of that).
Not familiar enough with the Star Trek replicator to comment on it.
Yeah you can build automated machines that cause transformations.
I don't want to simulate a universal constructor on a computer in Minecraft, I want a universal constructor in Minecraft.
I believe it is possible to build a universal computer inside Minecraft (they got switches and stuff), but that's not enough to make a universal constructor. It requires a specific kind of hardware.
RT @SJobs_Stories:
About web 2.0. "These web pages were built completely the second before I saw them [...], using the up-to-date informati…
Cool but does that have to do with constructors?
Cool but does that have to do with constructors?
Could one, in principle, build a universal constructor in Minecraft?
Happening now, @crit_rat's interview with Chiara Marletto at the @OxfordPopper society:
When you see the double spaces in the text at the bottom you realize Junior couldn’t have written this, it must have been somebody older.
@AmirSobhi11 @spartanfan15 @GregAbbott_TX
Religion is mostly harmful and has little of value to offer. But if you want to live in a world without it, one of the last things you want to do is outlaw it. Forbidden fruit tastes sweeter. There’s another way: persuasion.
@AmirSobhi11 @spartanfan15 @GregAbbott_TX
No—ideas need to evolve freely and they can’t be outlawed anyway.