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

The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#81

Post by sh_tinh_hair »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11
kartan wrote: post #4

> constant exposure to the worst of humanity on a daily basis takes an undeniable toll. This is one of the troubles police officers find in their daily work. When they are not part of the society where they work it is hard for them to empathize, as they just see the worst parts of that society. In the police case also to have members of the police that are part of the communities they serve. But counseling also is ne…

This is exactly why I wish we'd just hire more police so the existing ones can spend a shift a week doing positive community work. Helping folks, getting to know the 'normal' folks. This is when I get to the problem: I don't know what exactly I'd ask them to do, but it would be things like: Free (or very low cost) 2-hour windows of child care on the weekends to give parents a stress break, delivering hot food to elde…

In the 70s when police officers carried a baton and a revolver you'd encounter a lot more talk, diplomacy and second chances. In the age of terrorism and tazers that has become rarer in my experience.

Police officers need to have an 'edge' that is missing in normal people. Normalizing their experience with people and re-humanizing them isn't the best idea for their career and longevity in this day and age. Let them burn out in peace or find a way to cope with their distance from people (usually alcohol, seen that a lot).

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#82

Post by kurthr »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11
kartan wrote: post #4

> constant exposure to the worst of humanity on a daily basis takes an undeniable toll. This is one of the troubles police officers find in their daily work. When they are not part of the society where they work it is hard for them to empathize, as they just see the worst parts of that society. In the police case also to have members of the police that are part of the communities they serve. But counseling also is ne…

This is exactly why I wish we'd just hire more police so the existing ones can spend a shift a week doing positive community work. Helping folks, getting to know the 'normal' folks. This is when I get to the problem: I don't know what exactly I'd ask them to do, but it would be things like: Free (or very low cost) 2-hour windows of child care on the weekends to give parents a stress break, delivering hot food to elde…

In some areas (like Sunnyvale CA) you become an Emergency Responder and can alternate from police work to fireman (or EMT) every few years. I heard it described (by someone who was a policeman at the time) as going from hero to villain and back.

http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/PublicSafety/Recruiting....

I agree. I think it helps them see the people they "serve and protect" as better humans, and themselves as something other than the most righteous thug.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#83

Post by jessaustin »

nostrebored wrote: post #78
halomru wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would effectively make child pornography "normal" (at least as normal as other extreme fetishes). Many people fear that that would lead to more pedophiles acting on their urges. Then again some think that readily available child porn could reduce cravings and reduce child molestation. I'm not sure if any actual studies exist that shed some light on that problem

Studies are all fairly conclusive: indulging in watching porn related to your paraphilia makes you want to act on that paraphilia. Suggesting otherwise is completely absurd.

Would you care to point us to these studies?

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#84

Post by Broken_Hippo »

sh_tinh_hair wrote: post #81
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why I wish we'd just hire more police so the existing ones can spend a shift a week doing positive community work. Helping folks, getting to know the 'normal' folks. This is when I get to the problem: I don't know what exactly I'd ask them to do, but it would be things like: Free (or very low cost) 2-hour windows of child care on the weekends to give parents a stress break, delivering hot food to elde…

In the 70s when police officers carried a baton and a revolver you'd encounter a lot more talk, diplomacy and second chances. In the age of terrorism and tazers that has become rarer in my experience. Police officers need to have an 'edge' that is missing in normal people. Normalizing their experience with people and re-humanizing them isn't the best idea for their career and longevity in this day and age. Let them b…

I think this hits one something as well. I moved to Norway a few years back - and while the police have access to guns, they don't generally carry them. The public doesn't seem to want it for the most part.

The effect is the one you noticed in the 70s. From a normal citizen's perspective, the fear factor isn't there. You are generally OK so long as you cooporate, even if you tell the police to fuck off while still doing what they say. Some of this is culture: For instance, someone with a bow and quiver on their back walking through the summer palace that is here in town doesn't get harassed. There are fewer guns on the people.

I'm not sure about your outlook, however. I think they need the humanity to be able to treat people well. After all, normal people are the very people that become cops: That "edge" is a learned thing - just like it is in the military. Minimally, I'd go with a few years of training being mandatory before stepping out and becoming a rookie. Things like conflict resolution, dealing with the mentally ill, and interpersonal relations.

Edit: Oh, and stress. I'd include classes on dealing with stress in the training.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#85

Post by sh_tinh_hair »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #84
sh_tinh_hair wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 70s when police officers carried a baton and a revolver you'd encounter a lot more talk, diplomacy and second chances. In the age of terrorism and tazers that has become rarer in my experience. Police officers need to have an 'edge' that is missing in normal people. Normalizing their experience with people and re-humanizing them isn't the best idea for their career and longevity in this day and age. Let them b…

I think this hits one something as well. I moved to Norway a few years back - and while the police have access to guns, they don't generally carry them. The public doesn't seem to want it for the most part. The effect is the one you noticed in the 70s. From a normal citizen's perspective, the fear factor isn't there. You are generally OK so long as you cooporate, even if you tell the police to fuck off while still do…

Your suggestions are ideal in terms of training and compatibility with society. I just don't think that they are practical (in the US) right now.

The dysfunctional approach between police and citizens seems to be more manageable and cheaper and makes candidates more numerous. My cynicism is showing though.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#86

Post by CaptSpify »

bitlax wrote: post #24
_callcc wrote: post #20

I think we'll see more stratification on the internet in the coming years with subscriptions, etc. There's probably even a market right now for a paid version of reddit or HN. The sad fact is that the internet has gradually become a shithole as the entirety of humanity has joined in. Twitter, for example, is being dragged down by low quality user accounts that add nothing but noise. It's actively hurting the stock pr…

> The sad fact is that the internet has gradually become a shithole as the entirety of humanity has joined in. In what year do you feel the Internet was better than it is now?

My personal opinion: Before monetization. The Internet I remember was people volunteering their time, because they loved the project that they were working on. If some random blogger wrote an article about something, it was often shit, but it was also sincere. Now that there's money involved, it's less about feeling passionate about something, and more about what brings the most CPM.

This has led to walled-in gardens, where the noise is amplified. I'd even tentatively argue it's because having more users is seen as better, even if those users are fake, trolls, or non-contributers.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#87

Post by zw123456 »

I have seen articles similar to this one a number of times. The thing that I wonder about is if there are certain personality types that would be less sensitive than others while still able to remain objective in terms of applying the standards. For example, would a sociopath be unaffected by the content? Just wondering if a psychological screening for the right personality type to do the job would help.

BTW, thank you to the people that do that hard job including the HN screeners.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#88

Post by ManFromUranus »

_callcc wrote: post #20

I think we'll see more stratification on the internet in the coming years with subscriptions, etc. There's probably even a market right now for a paid version of reddit or HN. The sad fact is that the internet has gradually become a shithole as the entirety of humanity has joined in. Twitter, for example, is being dragged down by low quality user accounts that add nothing but noise. It's actively hurting the stock pr…

Isn't reddit already the paid version of reddit?

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#89

Post by klibertp »

chordatum wrote: post #19
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why I wish we'd just hire more police so the existing ones can spend a shift a week doing positive community work. Helping folks, getting to know the 'normal' folks. This is when I get to the problem: I don't know what exactly I'd ask them to do, but it would be things like: Free (or very low cost) 2-hour windows of child care on the weekends to give parents a stress break, delivering hot food to elde…

I don't feel that the second paragraph is realistic. But where to start in explaining why? Cop life is so complex that a weekly home economics shift isn't going to repair relationships, normalize psyches or adjust attitudes. There's a depth of behavioral psychology to this problem that extends well beyond imagining a one-size-fits all therapy plan. This can't be approached from the perspective of an outsider's view o…

In theory, police officers (and similar professions, also military) have various privileges, like early retirement and some other benefits (depending on the country).

I'm not sure if there even was a time where these things were enough, but right now they certainly don't outweigh the psychological devastation which almost inevitably follows being on duty for a couple of years.

I don't know the reasons but I'm sure there are many, ranging from cultural shifts in society to particular regulations they use to operate.

Still, the fact remains that the job is nowadays really bad. It's hard for people who never experienced it to understand how bad it is. An analogy which often speaks to programmers is: imagine the worst case of big corporation you can, stuffed with dick-head managers, full of pointless activities which obviously contradict each other, and so on. Now imagine every single manager above you can put you in jail for almost anything - but doesn't have to, if they don't feel like it - and that you are one weird rumor away from being fired (or worse). And that's on top of actual job being shitty, tedious, sometimes pointless, always psychically and emotionally draining.

All this is to say that I agree that "one day a week of social positive work" wouldn't help very much.

Re: The Human Toll of Protecting the Internet from the Worst of Humanity

#90

Post by ManFromUranus »

village-idiot wrote: post #41
wallace_f wrote: post #25

Political censorship cleverly wrapped in a much more palatable package delivered to you for your acceptance.

The original theories of free speech included basically no censorship on the theory that the marketplace of ideas (along with backlash for non-anonymous awful statements) would lead us in the direction of the truth, or at least stability. It appears that the anonymity of the Internet combined with the echo chamber effect has pretty much completely ruined that.

I use the internet and don't often encounter things I didn't expect. Usually what I see on a board, or forum, or sub-reddit etc is the material I expect to see there. Occasionally I see spam or something. Generally the community is probably capable of policing itself on most boards if you give them the tools, downvoting / flagging or something like that.

The crux of the problem is, if the internet remains free then it is also free to "fail". If you can only post lollipops and cat pictures guaranteed not to offend then the internet would contain almost nothing. Comments on such an internet would be so milquetoast as to be not worth reading in the first place.

You can already filter out almost 90% of the content you don't want to see by simply going to certain websites / forums and not others.

Post reply on HN