TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Too Clever by Half (2018)

145 点作者 lrsjng大约 6 年前

11 条评论

GVIrish大约 6 年前
This was posted here 9 months ago:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=17079369" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=17079369</a>
评论 #19334816 未加载
cr0sh大约 6 年前
Highly interesting writing. I found myself both agreeing and disagreeing with points - but mostly agreeing.<p>At the same time, some of it &quot;plucked at my liberal nose&quot;, which bothered me, but further reading seemed to indicate that the author wasn&#x27;t doing it to be &quot;on a side&quot; - in fact, I could see him &quot;plucking the conservative nose&quot; as well!<p>...and indeed, I believe that is intentional; his point being (I think) to get the reader to break out of the us-vs-them dynamic, try to see all points of view, especially those you don&#x27;t agree with, and think more for yourself instead of succumbing to the systems in place that attempt to tell you what to think and how - and are oh-so-seductive as they do so.<p>I like to think, as we probably all do, that &quot;I am better than that - I think for myself!&quot;, etc.<p>But do I?<p>This kind of writing makes me pause and question that; I find it a good...if a bit unsettling...thing.
评论 #19333916 未加载
bpchaps大约 6 年前
<i>The coyotes know </i>exactly* where the invisible fence begins and ends, without the benefit of ever wearing a shock collar. How do I know? Because they intentionally leave their scat on their side of the invisible fence, creating a demilitarized zone as precise and as well-observed as anything on the Korean peninsula.*<p>Hmm.. couldn&#x27;t this be just a result of the dogs not having marked the territory where the invisible fence is? As in, it&#x27;s just territory essentially open for the taking?
评论 #19334423 未加载
评论 #19334038 未加载
throwawaymath大约 6 年前
Alright so I was following with the author for the longform introduction about coyotes and raccoons (although essentially all his criticisms of raccoons apply equally to cats, which he seems to like).<p>But then he lost me when he started making it a piece about finance gone awry. I don&#x27;t really follow the point, can anyone walk me through his example more concisely? He&#x27;s throwing in a lot here in struck out letters, which is part of the joke, but I think I&#x27;m missing the big picture.
评论 #19334396 未加载
Animats大约 6 年前
(2018). Seen this before. It&#x27;s good, though.
评论 #19333318 未加载
评论 #19333574 未加载
async_dev大约 6 年前
Interesting writing style.<p>I really like the quote; &quot;It&#x27;s always the meta-game that gets you.&quot; (which is the whole point of the essay really).<p>Basically, if you think that you&#x27;ve found a way to win the mini-game that you&#x27;re playing - you&#x27;re being a coyote - so watch out! Because when that mini-game ends, the bigger, meta game is going to blow up and end your fun.<p>It&#x27;s basically the concept of &quot;finite&quot; vs &quot;infinite&quot; games: Don&#x27;t play an infinite game like a finite game. You&#x27;ll think that you&#x27;re clever and winning while you&#x27;re playing - but the game will always get you in the end.
评论 #19334515 未加载
g-erson大约 6 年前
I&#x27;ve seen this pop up a couple of times now as well - are there any other similarly thought provoking articles anyone recommends?
评论 #19334668 未加载
qqn大约 6 年前
A similar but, imho better piece can be found on <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;meaningness.com&#x2F;geeks-mops-sociopaths" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;meaningness.com&#x2F;geeks-mops-sociopaths</a>. Still, the interesting bits for me in this one were the following:<p>&quot;Financial innovation is always and in all ways one of two things — a new way of securitizing something or a new way of leveraging something.<p>&quot;Securitization is a ten-dollar word that means associating something in the real world (a cash flow from a debt, an ownership interest in a company, a deed on a property, a distributed ledger mathematical calculation, etc.) with a piece of paper that can be bought and sold separately from that real world thing. Leverage is a ten-dollar word that means borrowed money.<p>&quot;That’s it. There’s nothing new under the sun. Finding new ways to trade things (securitization) or new ways to borrow money on things (leverage) is what financial innovation is all about, and there are vast riches awaiting the clever coyotes who can come up with a useful scheme on either. The biggest market disasters happen when both leverage and securitization get mixed up with the same clever scheme.&quot;<p>For learning the above this was worth the read.
hyperpallium大约 6 年前
Not much of a meta-&quot;game&quot;, when humans are OP.<p>Scat marks the fence. They needn&#x27;t remember.
User23大约 6 年前
Corollary: contemporary humans are a domesticated species, so we are also mentally inferior to our ancestors. This is more plausible than it first sounds, because our superior techniques and technology more than make up for intrinsic shortcomings.
j2kun大约 6 年前
This is the kind of article that makes people who think they are geniuses (but have produced nothing useful) feel justified in hurting others to get what they want.
评论 #19333765 未加载
评论 #19334335 未加载