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

The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 228 posts

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#181

Post by eli_gottlieb »

ithilglin909 wrote: post #121
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you practicing crimethink? -A few hundred years ago, being an atheist was "crimethink", as was religious tolerance towards Jews, Muslims, and so forth. -A few hundred years ago, questioning the divine right of kings to rule was "crimethink". -In the early 1600s, Galileo stood trial and was condemned for the "crimethink" of saying the Earth moved around the Sun, in contradiction to the teachings of the Church. -…

You say you want diversity of opinion because you are a "liberal" but mainstream liberalism has next to nothing to do with classical liberalism. Your average urban, coastal "liberal" adheres to their orthodoxies with about the level openness to other opinions as a stereotypical religious zealot.

Yes, and your average Bayesian reasoner also "adheres to their orthodoxy" with little "openness to other opinions". Opinions don't move Bayesians. Opinions shouldn't move Bayesians. Stop demanding that other people shift their priors towards yours and show evidence.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#183

Post by hyperdunc »

mikebenfield wrote: post #149
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All right, here's some context. People are classified as "racist" for believing that the culture that came out of northern Europe is not inherently oppressive. (Source: Watching what's happened on university campuses for the last couple of years. I can't point you to a specific documentation of a specific event at the moment.) When that's the definition of "racist", then racism is indeed "nearly meaningless" - it's b…

> Watching what's happened on university campuses for the last couple of years Have you been on a university campus recently? Contrary to what some reactionary conservatives seem to think, they are not generally oppressive places with no tolerance for conservative thought. Yes, occasionally 19 year olds say and do some silly things. That's kind of what being young and having your first taste of adulthood is supposed…

If that's inherently oppressive then it's not much of a leap to say that disagreement, categorization and even existence is inherently oppressive. Which makes oppression a good thing.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#184

Post by MaysonL »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #144
supernovae wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how so? another comment without context.

All right, here's some context. People are classified as "racist" for believing that the culture that came out of northern Europe is not inherently oppressive. (Source: Watching what's happened on university campuses for the last couple of years. I can't point you to a specific documentation of a specific event at the moment.) When that's the definition of "racist", then racism is indeed "nearly meaningless" - it's b…

The "culture that came out of northern Europe" is a meaningless term.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#185

Post by bluthru »

supernovae wrote: post #130
ithilglin909 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say you want diversity of opinion because you are a "liberal" but mainstream liberalism has next to nothing to do with classical liberalism. Your average urban, coastal "liberal" adheres to their orthodoxies with about the level openness to other opinions as a stereotypical religious zealot.

Without context what you are saying is meaningless. Sure, "liberals" seem closed minded in not accepting racism, bigotry or hate speech but in accepting people for who they are, it's hard to say their opinions are stereotypical at all... I mean the democrats/liberals/progressives agree to disagree more often than not.

>Without context what you are saying is meaningless.

For example, it's beyond the pale to have a conversation about how demographics matter and that social science tells us that diversity is probably a net loss: http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/...

It reminds me of people who outright deny climate change.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#186

Post by bluthru »

guelo wrote: post #17

Right wing propaganda is so strong and coordinated these days that they can develop a new goal and drive a single message repeatedly across multiple platforms for months or years. This attack on Google is a new right wing message developed this year but they just keep hammering at it across all their channels tailoring their argument to the different audiences and continuously building mind share and momentum.

>Right wing propaganda is so strong and coordinated these days

In tech and the media, it's quite apparent that the large players are primarily socially left-leaning.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#187

Post by MaysonL »

sremani wrote: post #20
colordrops wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both right and left wing propaganda is strong and coordinated these days. I can't say anything that doesn't toe the line with either side and not have them look at me like I'm an asshole. I've been called both a socialist welfare state supporter and a reactionary corporate feudalist. Which is it folks. The division is worse than it ever was in my lifetime.

When you refuse to choose between stalin and hitler, you will have the unique opportunity to be called a nazi and communist at the same time... strange times!

In Peter Drucker's memoir, Adventures of a Bystander he relates the story of a contemporary, and onetime colleague of his, who rose fairly high in the Nazi regime, who mentioned, when Drucker was preparing to leave Germany in the early '30s, that he had low-numbered membership cards in both the Nazi and Communist parties.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#188

Post by acover »

platz wrote: post #127
humanrebar wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is have we reached a point where technology and globalization provide such enormous returns to the economies of scale that we can't go back or is all this corporate concentration just due to a lack of government enforcement? At some point, America decided that only horizontal monopolies counted, not vertical ones. Many of our concerns about antitrust would be assuaged if regulators started keeping sepa…

RE: Antitrust - on the right track. Consumer's can't solve this from the ground up. What's needed is to prevent certain kinds of key acquisitions. The law around acquisitions is too permissive in an age of network effects; acquisition laws were fine pre-internet but don't solve their intended purpose anymore. Normally, the market corrects against the biggest players because the biggest players are slow to change cult…

What about a consumer group to assert pressure?

Edit: a consumer group could have monopsony powers and be capable of negotiating concessions. Such as an open api.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#189

Post by fudgepack99 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #4

The solution really is a revitalization of antitrust policy. The reason markets work is because participants in them are bound to a 'race to the bottom' with many other participants doing the same thing. When companies aren't forced to race to the bottom against each other, the conditions of authoritarianism rise. Authoritarian structures don't have to necessarily come from government - monopolies, oligopolies and im…

>The solution really is a revitalization of antitrust policy.

It really isn't because the free market ideology never grasped the full complexity of how our world actually works. It's a false ideology that rulers preach to the masses, see here for a talk on "the free market".

Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349

I'll give you an example of what happed to PC videogames. Over the last 20 years corporations have taken full control over PC videogame software by a campaign of propaganada and selling games where they fraudulently take advantage of the publics ignorance and irrationality to steal game software by rebranding this software mmo/online. It's a way to cheat the population of owning their own software.

Games like Overwatch and world of warcraft and diablo 3 all normalized basically taking freedom away from customers. Markets can't work in a post technological society because corporations have all the power in the relationship to force policies. The human brain never evolved to live in a high tech capitalist society which is why we now have videogame dystopia out in PC game land.

In the 90's we had full blown level editors and server executables, post mass high speed internet. Game companies can simply take the software hostage and chain it to a backend server committing fraud on a mass scale. No law or anti trust can prevent this shit since most people are too technology illiterate to comprehend how they are being defrauded.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#190

Post by rorykoehler »

ithilglin909 wrote: post #121
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you practicing crimethink? -A few hundred years ago, being an atheist was "crimethink", as was religious tolerance towards Jews, Muslims, and so forth. -A few hundred years ago, questioning the divine right of kings to rule was "crimethink". -In the early 1600s, Galileo stood trial and was condemned for the "crimethink" of saying the Earth moved around the Sun, in contradiction to the teachings of the Church. -…

You say you want diversity of opinion because you are a "liberal" but mainstream liberalism has next to nothing to do with classical liberalism. Your average urban, coastal "liberal" adheres to their orthodoxies with about the level openness to other opinions as a stereotypical religious zealot.

I've heard all the alt-right arguments, long before the term alt-right made it into contemporary vernacular, and concluded that they are meritless ideas coming from idiots who lack the ability of genuine critical thought. They can say whatever they want, I don't really care, but I reserve the right to mock them and discriminate against them for being dangerous idiots.

Being open to new and alternative thoughts is not the same as allowing unrestricted hate from racist triggered cowards. If I deem an idea as non-constructive or even destructive I will discard it. Alt-right ideas and ideologies are dead, a hangover from times past. What we are experiencing is the final purge, the virus is rearing up again like a cold sore and the collective immune system of society will stamp it out for good. This is a necessary yet uncomfortable inevitability which is why I'm perfectly ok with it.

Post reply on HN