5 ms·

It's been my experience that if you read enough content online, you will realize that it's mostly people rediscovering old debates, and chiming in with what the

• SubuSS 5y ago
  I think that’s a software engineering dilemma spilling out to the rest of the world: how many ‘new software’ have you seen that are just a rehash of something existing already!
• handrous 5y ago
  Nearly every politics-related thread I participate in on HN ends up with my needing to start back at Book I of The Republic so we can get on the same page about how complex the idea of "Justice" actually is. Literally the first part of one of the first primary works a political philosophy student is likely to read, and it's news to people confidently presenting their ideas about how the economy or social policy or whatever ought to work. In a sense, I think the social sciences, philosophy, and the arts get "cranks" thinking they've figured them out, just like physics and math et c., do, except at a much higher volume, to the point that any discussion of those topics outside of highly specialized forums ends up consisting mostly of cranks arguing with one another, most of whom, if they have put any actual time into studying the topic at all, have fallen down some narrow crank-dominated rabbit hole of bad ideas. It's like if Flat Earthers were treated as having valid opinions.