Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Too many people have peed in the pool

stephenfry.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 555 posts

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#111

Post by bricemo »

There have been numerous studies showing that outrage is one of the most viral emotions. For whatever reason, seeing something that makes you upset has a very high correlation with people sharing/liking/retweeting. I think this unfortunate fact is what is being born out in social media.

Smithsonian had a good short article on it: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-emotion-go...

Research shows that amazing good news, like a huge leap forward in cancer research, is even more viral. But unfortunately those happen much more rarely up than someone saying something stupid and getting lambasted.

Ryan Holiday's book "Trust me I'm lying" also really opened my eyes to how a lot of this stuff works.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#112

Post by cm2012 »

zkhalique wrote: post #81
jgrahamc wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like the way that millennials communicate with emoji I'm GenX and not a millennial. I don't see anything wrong with using some emoji as part of my language. I already speak a language (English) which is some bastard child of French, German, Dutch, Arabic, etc. I'm happy to add a (poo emoji) when it's appropriate.

Emojis are fine. But I remember the first times I started seeing "LOL" and "ROTFLMAO". And I realized that the person wasn't really laughing, but they were quietly typing that on the keyboard. If you think about it, before AIM and online chat (way before texting), people hardly ever faked their emotions so much. I mean, you could fake a small laugh, but you didn't outright say that you're rolling on the floor laughin…

"lol" is an amazingly useful addition to written, casual language. It's the textual equivalent of a smile/head nod in normal conversation. Remember that in physical conversation, body language conveys 80-90% of the message - phrases like "lol" and emojis take the place of body language.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#113

Post by fche »

hnlogics wrote: post #90

It is never acceptable to attack and use violence against other individuals. The fact that you perceive them as making money from their marginalization does not make it acceptable for you and others to attack them to send death threats, and to engage in other horrific and violent behavior. It is reprehensible and disgusting that you think your hatred and bigotry is acceptable... because somebody might've made money.…

"It is never acceptable to attack and use violence against other individuals."

We're talking about electronic communications here, not meatspace.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#114

Post by justifier »

danharaj wrote: post #101
justifier wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i consider emojis as the tonal element missing from text think of it as visual intonation (o) (o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intonation_(linguistics)

I like your interpretation which ascribes intelligence and meaning to other peoples' behavior instead of the grandparent which seems to imply that the kids these days are just stupid and don't have any interesting thoughts to convey. You can't find the meaning in other peoples' behavior if you just assume it's meaningless from the get-go.

:P

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#115

Post by lkrubner »

jonstokes wrote: post #38

I have a theory about FB and Twitter -- or maybe more of an observation. Anyway, back in the stone age, people had bumper stickers with little slogans on them. And in the break rooms of various places of work, there was always a bulletin board an on a corner of it there was always some faded-from-to-many-xeroxes bit of humor/racism/sports fandom/sexism/dirty joke or other us-vs.-them thing on it that people would loo…

"this development is double-plus bad"

You meant:

"this development is double-plus ungood"

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#116

Post by Paul-ish »

seren wrote: post #23
carsongross wrote: post #15

I'm a bit monomaniacal about this, but the current online culture wars (and the previous offline culture wars) make me wish that secession didn't have such a bad name. It is obvious that large groups of people have irreconcilable differences of opinion on matters of free speech, sexuality, gun ownership and so on. It is a shame that rather than a firm handshake and friendly wave goodbye, we will end up with a totalit…

I don't know if it will prevail in the end, but I think that Reddit approach by splitting the community in small subgroups/communities has a better chance to last in the long run. Of course, you'll create feuds between communities but at least it is somewhat confined and not always spilling in the common public space. Unfortunately it also greatly increases the echo chamber / filter bubble but it seems you can not ha…

I have been waiting a long time for someone to use lessons learned from recommender systems to build a social media site like reddit, but rather than having users group themselves up, they would be shown posts algorithmically, based on how they have voted in the past. For example, if I vote for a lot of pro EFF posts, maybe I will see more posts about free software or something like that.

This also allows the site to treat votes as merely an expression of preference, not a judgment of quality (which is hard to define). Many sites try to enforce a rule that says "Don't downvote things disagree with." This is an impossible battle to win, there will always be people who downvote things they don't agree with. This behavior needs to be accounted for in the platform.

This is more "socially scalable" to me.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#117

Post by joopxiv »

r721 wrote: post #26

I wonder is it so hard to build an automatic "insult" detector with all recent progress with deep learning. Quick googling gave quite a couple of older papers: "Offensive Language Detection Using Multi-level Classification" http://www.eiti.uottawa.ca/~diana/publications/Flame_Final.p... "Automatic identification of personal insults on social news sites" http://labfs.eecs.northwestern.edu/~sara/Site/Publications_f...

When this was a topic in University a few years ago, it was still very hard to properly detect humor, especially sarcasm. If I understood this correctly, this whole episode was kicked of by Stephen making a joke about some lady's attire. I don't know what would be worse; the sanctimonious fallout or his tweet being censored by an automatic insult detector in the first place. (actually I do: the second).

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#118

Post by navait »

dasil003 wrote: post #22
carsongross wrote: post #15

I'm a bit monomaniacal about this, but the current online culture wars (and the previous offline culture wars) make me wish that secession didn't have such a bad name. It is obvious that large groups of people have irreconcilable differences of opinion on matters of free speech, sexuality, gun ownership and so on. It is a shame that rather than a firm handshake and friendly wave goodbye, we will end up with a totalit…

The problem is twofold: low bar to grabbing torches and pitchforks, and a high bar for recognizing someone else's humanity. In the old days you might not agree with your neighbor, but you had to live next to them. Now with the flick of a thumb you can denounce someone's entire existence before breakfast.

Of course, the risks are minimal on twitter. At worst they can write a death threat, but nobody's going to come to your house. They'll spend more time arguing with your defenders. And the attention span is short, by next week your controversy will be gone.

Contrast to getting into an extreme argument with your neighbor could result in a physical fight, destruction of property, or death.

Ultimately, this is why I really don't want to see articles on Internet discourse dominated by "culture wars" topics; So little is at stake. I highly doubt mass tweeting and public shaming will ever have much power over anyone, or change national policy or thought. However, someone once told me though that the most vicious fights are often the pettiest, so I only expect culture wars stuff to be more common in the future.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#119

Post by pier25 »

jonstokes wrote: post #38

I have a theory about FB and Twitter -- or maybe more of an observation. Anyway, back in the stone age, people had bumper stickers with little slogans on them. And in the break rooms of various places of work, there was always a bulletin board an on a corner of it there was always some faded-from-to-many-xeroxes bit of humor/racism/sports fandom/sexism/dirty joke or other us-vs.-them thing on it that people would loo…

Voluntary newspeak

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#120

Post by volaski »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #61
braythwayt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take a moment to look around, you’ll realize that a lot of socially progressive people are saying the exact same thing about Twitter, that the “professionally offended” are becoming too influential. Mind you, they’re talking about what happens when a woman criticizes video game culture and winds up with death threats and snuff porn choking her mentions. I am not saying this to suggest that one “side” or “the o…

I don't think Twitter is making things worse than they used to be. Society has the problem. Twitter just makes it public. Remember, the US used to have anti-communist witch hunts in which people were forced to give up their careers, it had actual physical lynchings, and it still has a culture where the police can do more or less whatever they want with limited accountability. People being disrespectful or even stalke…

> Society has the problem. Twitter just makes it public.

Yes. Thereby making things worse than they used to be.

Post reply on HN