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

181–190 of 555 posts

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#181

Post by mschuster91 »

malsun wrote: post #17

I left Twitter last year when it looked like the 'professionally offended' were becoming too influential. They didn't affect me as I keep a low profile, but it was like seeing an omen and noticing friends were buying into their hype. The way Twitter is now pandering to this lot with the recently announced Orwellian-style group, and other odd behaviour suggests that they approve of the current momentum. I'm just glad…

> I left Twitter last year when it looked like the 'professionally offended' were becoming too influential.

Unfortunately, it's not only Twitter where radfems and other (insert favorite swear word here) grab a stranglehold on public conversations. It's mass media too.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#182

Post by stickfigure »

chasing wrote: post #134
AJ007 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons. It might be derogatory jokes, but this can also include things like spreading urban legends which were debunked four decades ago. Just like Usenet and countless other online communities, what starts a a small group of fairly privileged and elite eventually degrades in to garbage as the reach increases. This is not so much an overall size issue but a rela…

> There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons... I hate this super-condescending attitude. Even if you do happen to be smarter than the average bear (which, don't pat yourself on the back yet: there may be things these "morons" know way more about than you do), it's still asshole-ish to assume that everyone else just be completely dismissed...

A casual perusal of the comments on any popular youtube video will disabuse you of this.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#183

Post by [deleted] »

JackFr wrote: post #173
toomuchtodo wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if you do happen to be smarter than the average bear > it's still asshole-ish to assume that everyone else just be completely dismissed... Devil's advocate: If you're above average intelligence, you're smarter than a majority of the populace by definition. Why would you not then dismiss the thoughts and ideas of those less educated? One person's condescension is another person's logic.

http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1999-15054-002 Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.

[deleted]

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#184

Post by chris_wot »

justifier wrote: post #114
danharaj wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Oh, well played sir!

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#185

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #125
AJ007 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons. It might be derogatory jokes, but this can also include things like spreading urban legends which were debunked four decades ago. Just like Usenet and countless other online communities, what starts a a small group of fairly privileged and elite eventually degrades in to garbage as the reach increases. This is not so much an overall size issue but a rela…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#186

Post by Shivetya »

jonstokes wrote: post #53
seren wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"A long time ago, I used to believe that Internet would usher a new age of Enlightenment since every one would have access to many different opinions and unbiased sources." Heh, same here. I think that so many of us simply underestimated the immense power of capitalism to co-opt and commodify everything it touches.

It wasn't capitalism that co-opted communities, it was the end product of modern politics which strives to play people against each other to maintain the power of those who govern. By subtle and some not so subtle phrasing they can turn people into irrational actors which makes them all the more easy to manipulate. There have been some really good areas for the technically inclined to congregate that were destroyed with politically driven conversations took over.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#187

Post by jsmthrowaway »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #174
KerryJones wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the problem. He shouldn't have to clarify his relationship, he shouldn't have to explain everything. In essence, that destroys jokes. It's not our job to know, but as we should assume innocence until proven guilty we should assume friendliness before assuming ridicule. If Beaven had a problem -- let her handle it. She's a big girl, we're not her collective parents.

Combine this with stories that rise to prominence based on a limited set of facts, distorted truths, or outright lies, and it's particularly pernicious. That people are instantly willing to offer the absolute worst wishes (and actions) they can muster, on a few words posted over a picture, and personally involve themselves in something they know NOTHING about is disheartening.

Not everyone deserves a microphone. Yet as an industry, we have built billions of them. (Comment sections, including this one, are the place to start when thinking about that.)

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#188

Post by logfromblammo »

tlrobinson wrote: post #159
sesutton wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an amusing comment because that's not how averages work.

Well, if you're talking about median it is.

And in a normal distribution--which measured attributes like height, IQ, and birth weight typically have--median, mean, and mode are all the same.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#189

Post by marcosdumay »

chasing wrote: post #134
AJ007 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons. It might be derogatory jokes, but this can also include things like spreading urban legends which were debunked four decades ago. Just like Usenet and countless other online communities, what starts a a small group of fairly privileged and elite eventually degrades in to garbage as the reach increases. This is not so much an overall size issue but a rela…

> There is no friendly way to say it, the mass market are morons... I hate this super-condescending attitude. Even if you do happen to be smarter than the average bear (which, don't pat yourself on the back yet: there may be things these "morons" know way more about than you do), it's still asshole-ish to assume that everyone else just be completely dismissed...

What?!?

Masses usually act like morons. That's a well known phenomenon, old enough to become jokes in movies, and the entire audience (a mass) to get it.

When people are acting smartly, they each do different things, and don't form a mass at all.

Re: Too many people have peed in the pool

#190

Post by things »

tekromancr wrote: post #161
cm2012 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

Possibly interesting side note, I have noticed over the last few years the vocalization of 'lol' being used more and more genuinely as an affirmation of a mildly humorous situation or statement that didn't actually happen to produce a laugh. I think it started being used sarcastically or ironically, but has lost that attribute for the most part.

I've seen this mainly with non-native English speakers. It may have migrated from there too.
Post reply on HN