6 ms·

Ted Kaczynski's Low-Tech Lifestyle

42 points by Sajarin 2y ago

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
Wonder what his take on dithering vs compression was
wetpaws 2y ago
[flagged]
nimbius 2y ago
If youre looking to an ascetic lifestyle there are dozens of other people you could reference besides ted. Alaskan off grid YouTube is a great resource, as are a lot of sustainable off grid tiny home channels. Theodore kazynskis manifesto alone does irreparable harm to the thesis that any person should look to his deeds or acts as a source of self improvement.
- vuln 2y ago
  The same could be said about the US Government.
- keybored 2y ago
  Well yeah? That’s obviously easier, more convenient and more readily accessible. But people are curious about his life apparently. How did the Mongolian Horde manage to travel and live in the horseback? No, please don’t do that. There are hundreds of peaceful horse riders out there you could learn from. Those other guys killed people.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  >Alaskan off grid YouTube isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?
westcort 2y ago
502 error; archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20240529085544/https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/ted-kaczynski-ted-kaczynski-s-low-tech-lifestyle https://web.archive.org/web/20240529085544/https://www.thete... I do not support in any way the crimes perpetrated by this terrorist.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  His crimes were (ironically) the perfect gift to his perceived enemies because it provided a reason to discredit and ignore him.
  - bankcust08385 2y ago
    Yep. His efforts were completely counterproductive and worthless. Right analysis but entirely wrong and stupid prescription. I read several of his books out of tackling of infamous works like Mein Kampf and Das Kapital. I couldn't bring myself to read Henry Ford's books, however.
- tonetegeatinst 2y ago
  100% agree on that. I think he did have some good arguments that were lost in his manifesto, but as they say a broken clock is wrong twice. Its a shame he used such violent and extream means, I think some of his points, not most of them, but some of them were interesting when I self reflect on how I depend on society and how technology is basically become a part of human evolution. That said I can't condone what he did or how he used violence to further his own agenda.
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    Is it really any different from what we see these days with protesters? They don’t care at all when they block highways and bridges and tunnels. Lots of people get impacted - including those needing to get to hospitals or loved ones. What about when protestors use physical force and violence to destroy businesses and property. In my opinion, all of it is terrorism based on the definition, but we just stopped using those labels.
    - giantg2 2y ago
      "What about when protestors use physical force and violence to destroy businesses and property" Then they're no longer protesters, but rather rioters.
    - 2y ago
ravenstine 2y ago
Not to be cheeky but... so what? Without absolving him of his crimes, I think Kaczynski's writings are fascinating, but the interviews from this page are pretty mundane. There's nothing particularly remarkable or "unabomber" about anything said on that page.
motohagiography 2y ago
while I find kacziynski contemptible, I live rurally and what he describes about relating to nature is accurate. your ear and other senses change. when you hunt you are the forest, or at least in nature of it. you can watch a fire burn at least as long as you might have watched a movie, and the experience of imagination is purer. you get a sense of what's left and essential about yourself without reinforcement, and psychologically of what's furniture and what's foundation. what made him pathetic was he never escaped the system he hated. what he struck out at were not its mechanisms and gears, but yet still just symbols he thought he could destroy to direct its attention to his writing. imo he never found the base reality that is immediately accessible to anyone who doesn't impose their conditions on it. ask a parent about what's true and real and good or someone missing a hand about compassion. If you're interested in this stuff, read just Walden and go camping, he didn't have any particularly meaningful insight into anything that's worth following.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  >what made him pathetic was untreated (untreatable?) mental illness
  - motohagiography 2y ago
    the guy killed three people and maimed a couple dozen others to get his rambling manifesto in a newspaper. he wasn't some troubled eccentric or even a plausible revolutionary.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Leaving his terrorism aside, I wonder what HN readers think of his ideas and writings. A glance at what he wrote makes it look pretty interesting. But I feel whatever he wrote has been dismissed and shadowed by what he did, so the ideas within never got much of a debate.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  Notably, Bill Joy found them significant: "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" (2000) <https://web.archive.org/web/20170801001546/https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170801001546/https://www.wired...>
- earthworldpsion 2y ago
  I do not think Kaczynski offered a terrible amount beyond what Jacques Ellul wrote. He does have a fascinating story, and he contributed through his manifesto, at least, the idea of oversocialization which has been expanded on by the likes of Byung-Chul Han (indirect as it might be). The other point I can think of would be the introduction of whataboutists to right wing movements and the detriment it has, but I think that thought will occur in places with heavy-handed bureaucracies. I don’t think I had seen the statement expressed so bluntly though. I found the manifesto interesting, but it wasn’t compelling beyond the few strokes of wisdom. In academia, you see exactly what he is talking about, especially nowadays.
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    I’m not familiar with the others you named - got anything from them you can point me to? I’m also not plugged into the “whataboutists” and didn’t understand the point with bureaucracies - could you please explain?
    - earthworldpsion 2y ago
      Ellul wrote “Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes” and “The Technological Society”. Both, I think, address a lot of what Kaczynski was addressing in Industrial Society and Its Future (ISaiF). In saying whataboutists, I was referring to a section of ISaiF called, “The Danger of Leftism.” I was trying to avoid a direct callout to a political practice by saying this, but it may have obfuscated the point too much. Here, he talks about the derailing of discussion that happens when your space includes leftists. As I remember, he says this is due to the rabbit hole creation that happens in attempting to address issues pertaining to minorities. In this way, your discussion veers away from the point at hand,which is actually a part of the CIA guide to disrupting dissidents (get people to fight over definitions and what the purpose of conversations is). The bureaucracy point is my own playfulness. I think a lot of people in governmental or academic circles have dealt with people who are more concerned with the rules at hand and the perception of following those rules than they are with the creation of good work. The section on oversocialization in ISaiF may clarify what I mean. It points at a class of people who are very, very concerned with the perception of others that is very common in the academic world. Edit: I forgot to address Byung-Chul Han’s relation. He writes short books in the style of Baudrillard, in that, it is heavy on social criticism. Specifically, I am thinking of “In the Swarm” and its critique of group thought in the social media age.

42 points by Sajarin 2y ago

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago

Wonder what his take on dithering vs compression was

wetpaws 2y ago

[flagged]

nimbius 2y ago

If youre looking to an ascetic lifestyle there are dozens of other people you could reference besides ted. Alaskan off grid YouTube is a great resource, as are a lot of sustainable off grid tiny home channels. Theodore kazynskis manifesto alone does irreparable harm to the thesis that any person should look to his deeds or acts as a source of self improvement.

vuln 2y ago
The same could be said about the US Government.
keybored 2y ago
Well yeah? That’s obviously easier, more convenient and more readily accessible. But people are curious about his life apparently. How did the Mongolian Horde manage to travel and live in the horseback? No, please don’t do that. There are hundreds of peaceful horse riders out there you could learn from. Those other guys killed people.
fsckboy 2y ago
>Alaskan off grid YouTube isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?

westcort 2y ago

502 error; archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20240529085544/https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/ted-kaczynski-ted-kaczynski-s-low-tech-lifestyle https://web.archive.org/web/20240529085544/https://www.thete... I do not support in any way the crimes perpetrated by this terrorist.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
His crimes were (ironically) the perfect gift to his perceived enemies because it provided a reason to discredit and ignore him.
- bankcust08385 2y ago
  Yep. His efforts were completely counterproductive and worthless. Right analysis but entirely wrong and stupid prescription. I read several of his books out of tackling of infamous works like Mein Kampf and Das Kapital. I couldn't bring myself to read Henry Ford's books, however.
tonetegeatinst 2y ago
100% agree on that. I think he did have some good arguments that were lost in his manifesto, but as they say a broken clock is wrong twice. Its a shame he used such violent and extream means, I think some of his points, not most of them, but some of them were interesting when I self reflect on how I depend on society and how technology is basically become a part of human evolution. That said I can't condone what he did or how he used violence to further his own agenda.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  Is it really any different from what we see these days with protesters? They don’t care at all when they block highways and bridges and tunnels. Lots of people get impacted - including those needing to get to hospitals or loved ones. What about when protestors use physical force and violence to destroy businesses and property. In my opinion, all of it is terrorism based on the definition, but we just stopped using those labels.
  - giantg2 2y ago
    "What about when protestors use physical force and violence to destroy businesses and property" Then they're no longer protesters, but rather rioters.
  - 2y ago

ravenstine 2y ago

Not to be cheeky but... so what? Without absolving him of his crimes, I think Kaczynski's writings are fascinating, but the interviews from this page are pretty mundane. There's nothing particularly remarkable or "unabomber" about anything said on that page.

motohagiography 2y ago

while I find kacziynski contemptible, I live rurally and what he describes about relating to nature is accurate. your ear and other senses change. when you hunt you are the forest, or at least in nature of it. you can watch a fire burn at least as long as you might have watched a movie, and the experience of imagination is purer. you get a sense of what's left and essential about yourself without reinforcement, and psychologically of what's furniture and what's foundation. what made him pathetic was he never escaped the system he hated. what he struck out at were not its mechanisms and gears, but yet still just symbols he thought he could destroy to direct its attention to his writing. imo he never found the base reality that is immediately accessible to anyone who doesn't impose their conditions on it. ask a parent about what's true and real and good or someone missing a hand about compassion. If you're interested in this stuff, read just Walden and go camping, he didn't have any particularly meaningful insight into anything that's worth following.

fsckboy 2y ago
>what made him pathetic was untreated (untreatable?) mental illness
- motohagiography 2y ago
  the guy killed three people and maimed a couple dozen others to get his rambling manifesto in a newspaper. he wasn't some troubled eccentric or even a plausible revolutionary.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Leaving his terrorism aside, I wonder what HN readers think of his ideas and writings. A glance at what he wrote makes it look pretty interesting. But I feel whatever he wrote has been dismissed and shadowed by what he did, so the ideas within never got much of a debate.

dredmorbius 2y ago
Notably, Bill Joy found them significant: "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" (2000) <https://web.archive.org/web/20170801001546/https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170801001546/https://www.wired...>
earthworldpsion 2y ago
I do not think Kaczynski offered a terrible amount beyond what Jacques Ellul wrote. He does have a fascinating story, and he contributed through his manifesto, at least, the idea of oversocialization which has been expanded on by the likes of Byung-Chul Han (indirect as it might be). The other point I can think of would be the introduction of whataboutists to right wing movements and the detriment it has, but I think that thought will occur in places with heavy-handed bureaucracies. I don’t think I had seen the statement expressed so bluntly though. I found the manifesto interesting, but it wasn’t compelling beyond the few strokes of wisdom. In academia, you see exactly what he is talking about, especially nowadays.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  I’m not familiar with the others you named - got anything from them you can point me to? I’m also not plugged into the “whataboutists” and didn’t understand the point with bureaucracies - could you please explain?
  - earthworldpsion 2y ago
    Ellul wrote “Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes” and “The Technological Society”. Both, I think, address a lot of what Kaczynski was addressing in Industrial Society and Its Future (ISaiF). In saying whataboutists, I was referring to a section of ISaiF called, “The Danger of Leftism.” I was trying to avoid a direct callout to a political practice by saying this, but it may have obfuscated the point too much. Here, he talks about the derailing of discussion that happens when your space includes leftists. As I remember, he says this is due to the rabbit hole creation that happens in attempting to address issues pertaining to minorities. In this way, your discussion veers away from the point at hand,which is actually a part of the CIA guide to disrupting dissidents (get people to fight over definitions and what the purpose of conversations is). The bureaucracy point is my own playfulness. I think a lot of people in governmental or academic circles have dealt with people who are more concerned with the rules at hand and the perception of following those rules than they are with the creation of good work. The section on oversocialization in ISaiF may clarify what I mean. It points at a class of people who are very, very concerned with the perception of others that is very common in the academic world. Edit: I forgot to address Byung-Chul Han’s relation. He writes short books in the style of Baudrillard, in that, it is heavy on social criticism. Specifically, I am thinking of “In the Swarm” and its critique of group thought in the social media age.