It's the hacker news "culture". As much as this site loves to hate on reddit (and I don't disagree with reddit hate), this community has its own cringe and pretentiousness which can be seen in silly articles like this reaching the front page.
Edit for the downvoters: what does this article have to with technology besides the fact that some self proclaimed hacker thinks this article is interesting? This isn't hacker news, this is an attempt at hacker "community" and all the off topic articles are so random it makes me cringe and not visit this site anymore. This site comes off as a lifestyle magazine anymore.
This really seems like a burden of proof situation. If a bad actor is demonstrably trying to be a bad actor, then they are a bad actor, and we should make a big deal out of it. Saying "yes, they are bad actors, but can you prove they actually accomplished their goal?" just enables more bad actors. Perhaps the burden of proof that a bad actor did not accomplish their goal should be on the bad actor. Otherwise more and more will spring up, and we'll just throw our hands up saying, "meh, we can't prove they were effective".
This sounds eerily similar to some of the early proofs of God. I think there may be a flaw in this line of thinking.
|Thus humans can never understand the brain because the brain has equal complexity to itself and for the brain to understand the brain then it must have greater complexity than itself which is impossible.
We don't need to know the entire state of the brain at any given moment to understand the mechanics of the brain, just as we don't need to know the entire state of every molecule on planet Earth in order to understand it's physics.