Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Most likely, but we still shouldn't assume its a property of the universe. Its a choice they are making and so the consequences good or bad should be attributed to them



When you are investing $500,000 of your own money, are you going to check it out thoroughly first?


When they invest $500,000 of their own money and it makes millions, do they decline the profit? Their behavior is perfectly rational, but still ultimately a choice they make, and both the good and bad are a result of that.

Unless you are going to argue that they aren't rational adults with agency of their own, in which case I would question letting them decide anything at all


I don't see what that has to do with what I wrote.


Tbh I don’t know what your comments have to do with mine either?

I was responding to the phrase “have to”, and pointing out that they don’t “have to” do this. Then you brought up things like people investing a lot of their money? It still doesn’t change that it’s a choice. They could be investing the gdp of Canada and making rational decisions around the money, but it is still ultimately a choice


I didn't write "have to". Perhaps you are replying to someone else?


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31902260

This is the original comment I replied to, I thought you were asking a clarifying question and tried to reiterate my main point. My apologies if there was a confusion


That comment,

> we still shouldn't assume its a property of the universe

is actually a bit funny I think. One could post that comment as a reply to almost anything :-)

And then see how they interpret it and how they react


Yea, in my critique, it’s probably not a sentence that triggers people towards good conversation, but I’m not really sure how to broach the concept that everyone has free will when people are legitimating discussing how the people in charge of businesses have no choice and have to do something bad.

Tbh the defense of most business leaders sounds like someone defending a rabid dog or a killer robot’s action’s.

I really can’t understand how some people can simultaneously believe that execs and founders deserve the outsized compensation for making all the decisions critical to the business, while simultaneously believing in this neo-Calvinist philosophy where the elite _have_ to fuck over everyone for their own benefit and it’s ridiculous to think that they could chose ethics over money

Like, do they have free will and so you can make the argument that their choices led to greater profit and they deserve a big cut, or are they simple tiny dancers on the wind of fate who can’t do anything of their own accord which (if you were being consistent) means that they brought nothing of benefit to the business and therefore should get none of the profit?




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: