Why is it soul crushing? It looks to me like people are projecting their fears and insecurities onto this single ad. Sure, strategically Apple possibly should've caught on before releasing, but people are still being overly sensitive. Should everyone be throwing tantrums about Devin as it's presenting itself to replace developers? It is what it is, things change.
Doesn't really matter if I do because I don't doubt some people feel strong emotions on this matter. But the fact remains, this is an ad and guitars aren't going extinct. People should get a handle on their emotions.
Also, I'm aware, that's why I wrote, "the way Devin is presenting itself". Apple doesn't have a factory where they're constantly crushing pianos either. So check your tone.
HN is great for news, but man it sometimes feels like I am browsing LinkedIn when I go to the comments. The cult of techno optimism and progress at all costs is strong here. It is entertaining, but man it is also depressing.
Imagine an ad for a virtual puppy game using hydraulic press to crush real dogs, showing closeup of twisted broken head and blood splashing on camera and all. Surely you can understand why most people can get very upset seeing that, and dog owners in particular can feel like their soul is being crushed?
Well, artists and musicians can have as much emotional attachment to their tools as pet owners to their pets. To most people the ad is only slight disturbing, but to the artists (and the nostalgic) it’s soul crushing. That’s why Apple is apologizing: they’ve offended their core market.
I cannot fathom how one can compare crushing inanimate objects (commodity ones, at that) to murdering living things.
Even then; we regularly celebrate movies in which human beings are depicted as having their brains splattered out of their heads (The Departed won best picture), so I’m not sure where the basis to complain about depicting even murder in video art comes from. Not everyone likes puppies; pretty much 100% of everyone loves at least some humans.
Sure. I'm not claiming that everyone must find the ad disturbing, just that the ones who do tend to feel much more strongly than those who don't, and their feelings tend to not to be dismissed as hyperbole by the general public. I chose puppies as example since many people love dogs, but you can just as easily substitute your favorite objects / animals here.
If you want to know why someone feels a certain way, you will set yourself up for failure by first explaining to them why they shouldn't feel that way (doubly so if you imply they're "throwing a tantrum" or "being overly sensitive"). You've telegraphed your unwillingness to hear them out, so why should they give you any of their time?
Frankly, I have to wonder if you actually want to know or whether the question was a feint so you could express a very personal criticism less directly. If you weren't comfortable saying it to them directly - maybe that's a sign you still have swipes to edit out.
Technology is going to keep marching forward as it always has. Most of the gadgets being destroyed in the ad are fairly recent innovations. And they had already done their fair share of disruption too. Speakers made live music less necessary, cameras made portrait painting less popular, and typewriters started the slow death of handwriting.
Should we mourn their technological predecessors or recognize we live in an ever-changing world we've only seen a small snapshot of?
And so ad where a guitar and some camera lenses are destroyed isn't "soul-crushing". Saying that is being overly dramatic.
So you open up asking someone for their opinion, and in the next comment you dismiss it with "well you can't stop it".
I'd rather not beat around the bush if you simply wanted to disagree with a user instead of pretending to seek out an alternative POV.
>Should we mourn their technological predecessors or recognize we live in an ever-changing world we've only seen a small snapshot of?
You can still buy vinyl records today that work in a phonograph made in the 60's. It is hard (but not impossible) to truly "kill off" old mediums. It definitely can't be done on the order of decades.
No one's mourning the death of music, because music isn't dead. And you don't get to tell people how they should react and feel to media.
It was a rhetorical question. I can't force people to feel a certain way but I can certainly say that they're being overly dramatic.
And right, exactly, none of these things are actually extinct yet, so why dramatize? And if at some point they die off, it won't be Apple that caused it. It will happen because people stop caring, practising and using the things in question.
"You have no right" here means you have no moral right, not a legal right. Yes, you have every right to make fun of people. But it is a jerk move. It's the prototypical jerk move.
As for hypocrisy - if someone says, "you're acting like a jerk" and you say, "I have every right to make fun of you," you're not going to be able to convince me these are equivalent positions.
Ok, well I was talking about a moral right then, and not a legal right.
I actually think the jerks are the ones who are over reacting and not engaging with the substance of the disagreement, and the moral position is from the ones who don't take their overreaction seriously.
If you want to say that everyone should just chill out, and not take any of this seriously , then that would be agreeing with me completely as that's my entire point and motivation.
> if someone says, "you're acting like a jerk"
No actually. That's not what they are doing.
Instead what they are doing is dismissing well reasoned criticism off hand without addressing the argument.
Instead of making a counter argument, where they try to defend the silly overreaction with arguments, instead they do the equivalent of saying "well that's just our/your opinion, man! You have no (moral?) right to tell people otherwise.".
They are the ones hitting the eject button from any sort of discourse.
And if you flee and retreat from actually engaging, no that should not be taken seriously.
> you're not going to be able to convince me these are equivalent positions.
Correct they aren't equivalent. The other person is worse. Way worse. Because they are the ones who fled to not addressing the substance of the matter.
It is quite reasonable. And the other person had the jerk reaction, by instead of addressing it, they instead say that it is just that person's opinion, and they have "no right".
That is not engagement. That is the poor behavior.
Two wrongs don't make a right. When your position becomes "I have a right to mock you," you've lost the argument in my eyes. You've confessed that argument is insufficient and you need to rely on insult to articulate yourself in this instance. Maybe you're right, maybe you could have articulated a point that would sway me if you had given it some more thought, but that's not evident in what's in front of me.
That comment isn't my favorite, but it isn't an attack. It's still an assertion of the commenters position, with language that's stronger than I'd prescribe but within bounds in my estimation. Flag and/or downvote it if you disagree.
If you want to know what I personally believe, on a postage stamp, I wouldn't say people "have no right" to make such assertions (I don't think it's a productive or interesting line of conversation), but I think it's a bad call to make them (I think it's reductive and misses the forest), so I'm sympathetic to that perspective.
If you think that the reason people play guitar is that they haven't come across a better piece of technology, then I think you fundamentally misunderstand. I think these people simply value certain experiences and ways of relating to the world that you don't value (which is not a criticism, that's fine). Maybe it would seem less like an overreaction to you if you shared their values. Maybe you would have a more interesting time if you tried to understand what those values were instead of trying to explain to people why they're wrong for holding them.
ETA: I think this nugget of wisdom from Pirate Software is good to keep in mind.
People frequently express themselves in ways that are infuriating and unhelpful (myself included, embarrassingly often). Learning to cut through the noise and learn from them despite that is a valuable social skill. We can't change the fact that people act this way, but we can decide how we will receive and respond to it.
I understand we do these things because we find enjoyment in them. But none of these instruments and gadgets are even going extinct. There might be real shifts happening in our culture but at the end of the day this is just an ad. The emotional baggage that causes someone to be hurt by this should probably be handled at a personal level.
And thanks for sharing your thoughts. There isn't anything you said I'd disagree with. My original point was quite simple: people shouldn't be so soft. Although, I guess that's not really helpful and me saying that won't flip a switch in someone's head.
Appreciate you taking the time to consider. I just feel I should note:
> I understand we do these things because we find enjoyment in them.
It's not that people enjoy making art (though they usually do). People have a much more profound relationship to art than that. I'll try to illustrate in a way that's more grokkable to the technically inclined.
Once I was injured and couldn't use a computer other than a phone for 10 months. I was very frustrated and depressed. I felt like I had lost access to a part of myself.
There were definitely moments that were soul crushing. In particular times when I couldn't get software to work, because I couldn't even extract an error message or any relevant telemetry from the confines of a nerfed operating system, so I couldn't even begin to troubleshoot. I wasn't accustomed to my computer being a black box I couldn't interrogate. It ran counter to my image of myself and my abilities.
One time, several years later, a friend almost spilled wine on my ergonomic keyboard (which I absolutely need to use a computer after my injury). I told them to be careful. They pretended to spill it again. I told them that absolutely wasn't funny to me. They told me I was overreacting.
Do you think that's because I enjoy using Linux and writing Python? Or do you think there could be a bit more than that going on?
From a tech person POV the big difference is I buy a camera I can do what I want on it, I buy and iPad and have to pay Apple a tax for all computing that goes through it.
