Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC) • Hacker News Board

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#11

Post by guitarbill » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 4:35 AM UTC

md_ wrote: post #3

guitarbill wrote: post #2

Everybody deserves justice. I don't think Medium posts and a lynch mob are the way this is achieved. Get the police involved when a crime is committed. Enough with the hearsay character assassinations. This time, the author even admits that he's conflicted and that his memory isn't completely reliable. So as somebody from the "out-group" it's hard to take it as seriously as it probably should be taken :( Edit: Instea…

There's a bit of a thin-skinned-ness to editing your own post to complain about downvoting. (I get downvoted sometimes. Honestly, who the fuck cares?) To answer the substantive point you make, I think the hyperbole of "lynch mob" is a bit overused in these circumstances. Historically, lynch mobs hung (often innocent) victims from trees. Writing Medium posts isn't exactly equivalent. So what exactly is your complaint?…

> There's a bit of a thin-skinned-ness to editing your own post to complain about downvoting. (I get downvoted sometimes. Honestly, who the fuck cares?)

Yeah, but it worked! Shit, maybe that's the equivalent to click-bait. I see it as a community service though. Downvoting helps if something is factually wrong. But if you downvote because you disagree, but then don't articulate that, you aren't helping anyone. You're doing it to feel smug.

> I think the hyperbole of "lynch mob" is a bit overused

It's true, but it is kind of career-destroying. At least for me it would be, I'm not so teflon.

My complaint is you have to be really careful publishing stuff like this for public consumption, which it is. What are we supposed to do with this information? By putting it out there, he's expecting some kind of response, right? But will he get the response he wants? Once the genie is out of the bottle, it's out.

I mean, worst case, most people ignore it, nothing gets done, and if/when it comes to a trial Mr. Applebaum's lawyers say: "Oh, person has been badmouthing us for years, he's biased, his testimony is unreliable." Shit. Now you're one step further away from "justice".

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#12

Post by guitarbill » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 4:43 AM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #6

gdulli wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SJW values What does this mean?

SJW is most commonly used as a pejorative term these days, and it's anyone's guess what it's supposed to represent other than "people who aren't agreeing with me."

I didn't just mean "people who aren't agreeing with me", but specifically people who disagree but who try and use some kind of censorship or shaming to silence disagreements, instead of engaging in them. AFAIK, this is a common tactic of the mentioned group. (At the time of the edit, I had no replies but like -5. Not that it really matters.)

Disagreement is constructive at some level, and so it's a good thing in my opinion.

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#13

Post by greglindahl » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 5:08 AM UTC

guitarbill wrote: post #12

greglindahl wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SJW is most commonly used as a pejorative term these days, and it's anyone's guess what it's supposed to represent other than "people who aren't agreeing with me."

I didn't just mean "people who aren't agreeing with me", but specifically people who disagree but who try and use some kind of censorship or shaming to silence disagreements, instead of engaging in them. AFAIK, this is a common tactic of the mentioned group. (At the time of the edit, I had no replies but like -5. Not that it really matters.) Disagreement is constructive at some level, and so it's a good thing in my o…

What "mentioned group"? - I don't think many/any people think of themselves as SJWs now that it's pejorative and widely applied to people who never thought of themselves that way.

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#14

Post by fulafel » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 5:29 AM UTC

guitarbill wrote: post #2

Everybody deserves justice. I don't think Medium posts and a lynch mob are the way this is achieved. Get the police involved when a crime is committed. Enough with the hearsay character assassinations. This time, the author even admits that he's conflicted and that his memory isn't completely reliable. So as somebody from the "out-group" it's hard to take it as seriously as it probably should be taken :( Edit: Instea…

Lots of things are criminalized that shouldn't be, I think CCC crowd holds that position pretty firmly as well.

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#15

Post by devoply » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 5:43 AM UTC

woodandsteel wrote: post #7

Good article by Isaacson. I would add I think it would be good if the CCCers got some outside consultation, both from people in the sex abuse field, and at least one person who is an expert on sociopaths, since that is what it seems JA is. I think it would also helpful would be helpful to learn communication skills like active listening and the ones in Marshall Rosenberg's book Nonviolent Communication.

The problem with this sort of thing is that when the pendulum swings the other way then we have a different set of problems. Large subcultures invite sociopaths as there is a population there to exploit. At the end of the day you have to be good at detecting those sort of people, and it's incredibly hard. Eventually though the group identifies and weeds them out. But they exist amongst us and many of them are respected members of their respective communities.

They are good at getting up there in status and because of status deflecting blame from themselves. It's hard to challenge them even if you know them for who they are, the masses will not see it until they have already done a bunch of damage to the community.

In order to get along people have to give other people benefit of doubt. And that's a opening for a skilled manipulator to play people. It's part and parcel of dealing with human beings.

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#16

Post by kalleboo » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 12:05 PM UTC

guitarbill wrote: post #2

Everybody deserves justice. I don't think Medium posts and a lynch mob are the way this is achieved. Get the police involved when a crime is committed. Enough with the hearsay character assassinations. This time, the author even admits that he's conflicted and that his memory isn't completely reliable. So as somebody from the "out-group" it's hard to take it as seriously as it probably should be taken :( Edit: Instea…

If a group of people trust the testimony of the claimed victims and collectively agree to disavow of the conduct of the alleged perpetrator, what's wrong with them all choosing to reject that person? Why does the state (police) have to be involved in everything? Are you saying the state's verdict is always correct, and nobody should disagree with anyone who hasn't been convicted by the state?

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#17

Post by hzhzjsj » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 12:06 PM UTC

Eh, wtf? How safe space kindergarten is this berlin hacker scene anyway?? And here I thought hackers to be the bastion of individual liberty and take responsibility for your own actions. If you were forced against your will, with witnesses apparently, then why wasnt this a crime scene swarming with cops? We all do stupid things sometimes under the influence but you chose to impair your judgement and consent to the activity then you can't retroactively claim you're a victim of a crime. This looks mostly like a witch hunt to me. As if not one of you or your friends would be able to stand up to the queer nerd and drama queen that is Jacob applebaum

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#18

Post by tnone » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 2:34 PM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #13

guitarbill wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't just mean "people who aren't agreeing with me", but specifically people who disagree but who try and use some kind of censorship or shaming to silence disagreements, instead of engaging in them. AFAIK, this is a common tactic of the mentioned group. (At the time of the edit, I had no replies but like -5. Not that it really matters.) Disagreement is constructive at some level, and so it's a good thing in my o…

What "mentioned group"? - I don't think many/any people think of themselves as SJWs now that it's pejorative and widely applied to people who never thought of themselves that way.

It's not so much one group as an ideology spread though media and academia, but some did try to take on the label sincerely in an attempt to reclaim its reputation (Guardian columnist Laurie Penny comes to mind). Regardless, columnists like Jessica Valenti, Amanda Marcotte, industry professionals (see LambdaConf) and cling-ons (Shanley Kane, Adria Richards), activist students (like Emma Sulkowicz) and professors (like AW Peet) have sought their pound of blood from Professors (Jordan Peterson), scientists (Tim Hunt, Matt Taylor) and professionals (Brendan Eich). Accusations of fascism get thrown around, censorship is demanded, careers and families are targeted. Usually under the guise of morality and standing up to bullies, despite the timeline of events and what equal application of policy would say.

They are excellent as seeing themselves on the right side of history, and they were the ones who pioneered the kind of mobbing and shaming techniques online that they consider to be harassment and violence when the shoe is on the other foot.

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#19

Post by rurban » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

woodandsteel wrote: post #7

Good article by Isaacson. I would add I think it would be good if the CCCers got some outside consultation, both from people in the sex abuse field, and at least one person who is an expert on sociopaths, since that is what it seems JA is. I think it would also helpful would be helpful to learn communication skills like active listening and the ones in Marshall Rosenberg's book Nonviolent Communication.

But if you read the long Zeit article[1] and esp. the latest taz article[2] it becomes clear that the other party consists also of psychopaths whose actions were even more dangerous.

[1] http://www.zeit.de/kultur/2016-08/jacob-appelbaum-rape-sexua...

[2] https://www.taz.de/!5361578/

Re: Not Working for Us (Preparing to Discuss Jacob Applebaum at CCC)

#20

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 3:10 PM UTC

gdulli wrote: post #4

guitarbill wrote: post #2

Everybody deserves justice. I don't think Medium posts and a lynch mob are the way this is achieved. Get the police involved when a crime is committed. Enough with the hearsay character assassinations. This time, the author even admits that he's conflicted and that his memory isn't completely reliable. So as somebody from the "out-group" it's hard to take it as seriously as it probably should be taken :( Edit: Instea…

> SJW values What does this mean?

[deleted]