I don’t really understand the categories you’ve set up or the traditions you’re referring to, but it seems like consequentialist ethics would be good as a historical exercise, but not much else. Because we mostly don’t know what will happen when we act, at least not with the clarity that that kind of analysis would need. I think the implicit ethical problem here is that there’s not much any individual can do that will have a measurable effect when it comes to entities as large and powerful as big tech (or any other industry). So then how do you think about making ethical decisions?
That moment while driving when the pavement is wet and the sun is at a low angle and suddenly the ground is as bright as the sun and you can’t see anything. But all the time!
It sounds more complicated than just figuring out how to prevent glare. Even if you do that, the terrain will always be illuminated in this strange high contrast scenario. I find myself thinking about how photographers use reflectors to avoid this in their portrait subjects.
Stick with QCT, I’ve been coming back to that essay for 20 years. Given your other recs, you might want to go back to a few of the Dialogues: the Apology, the Laches, maybe the Phaedrus. And if you’re serious about the divine origin stuff, after reading the Apology, read the third chapter of Walden.
I thought the point of using observables over promises is that they have cancellation, and presumably an implementation of race would cancel any slower request (i.e., handle the abort controller automatically)? Is that not the case?
What a great project, thank you. I appreciate that you can link to specific chapters, for example [0], or the one that I haven't been able to stop thinking about for twenty years [1],--though the latter would really benefit from the illustration.
I think “Can’t Get You Out Of My Head” may be of more interest, topically, to hacker news readers, because it converges on the use of computing as a means of controlling social unrest.