‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’ • Hacker News Board

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#581

Post by 18pfsmt » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 6:37 PM UTC

optimuspaul wrote: post #564

pathseeker wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US they are related to conservatives as well. Libertarians share very little with liberals when it comes to views on what the government should regulate. The thing they have in common is social liberalism (allow gay marriage, individual drug use, etc).

So heres the problem I'm seeing here. Liberal is not the opposite of Conservative. Conservatism opposes Progressivism, Liberalism opposes Authoritarianism. For the most part people in the US are liberal, they believe in general equality and freedom. Progressives are also generally liberal but also tend to stir the pot and want change. It is also very possible to be conservative and liberal, which a large minority in…

The way I see it, the authoritarians in the US hijacked the word liberal and want to conflate it with progressive, despite the derivation of the word itself. If one is a proponent of liberty, forcing people to do things/ not do things is authoritarian, and therefore, not liberal. I'm all for change, but I despise force (other than Gandhi's 'force of truth', Satyagraha: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyagraha).

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#582

Post by camgunz » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #568

camgunz wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can also show you the recent amendments to the Ontario law in which it is now illegal to not use non-gendered pronouns. No need, I'm familiar with it. Here's what they themselves say about it: --- Is it a violation of the Code to not address people by their choice of pronoun? The law recognizes that everyone has the right to self-identify their gender and that “misgendering” is a form of discrimination. As one hu…

> I'm sure there have been cases where someone didn't deserve to be fired Also, I just wanted to note that I don't really buy into this argument. I don't see why someone "deserves to be fired" for their political views, no matter how racist, as long as they don't let their views impact the performance of their duties. So the Kim Davis' of the world absolutely deserve to be fired, but the plethora of other examples I…

> I don't see why someone "deserves to be fired" for their political views, no matter how racist, as long as they don't let their views impact the performance of their duties.

I agree if by "political views" you mean things like monetary policy or foreign policy. But I personally couldn't ask women to work with people who think they shouldn't be in the workplace, or LGBT people to work with people who think they're irredeemable abominations, or people of color to work with people who think they're inferior because of their race. To me, these views disqualify you from being a productive member of society and I don't really classify them as political views. For example, I don't think anti-semitism is a political view, I think it's just hatred and bigotry. Further, I'm mildly offended when I see people equating "bigotry against conservatives" with "bigotry against historically oppressed groups", because those oppressed groups have suffered intense physical harm. Conservatives really have not. Another reason this whole thing is a false equivalence.

> people are driven from moderate positions to the opposite extremist positions, because the people harassing them are just so unreasonable, and moderate leftists like yourself have zero sympathy for them. This is one way radicalization can happen.

Mostly I agree, but I don't think that in general "the people who are harassing them" are being unreasonable. I think culture in the US is largely sexist, racist, and homophobic and we've gotten used to it as we've grown up in it. It's not hard to find someone saying something offensive. I do think it's a shame that otherwise good people are caught up in stuff like this. But I think it's worse that women, LGBT people, and people of color have had to live in this culture.

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#583

Post by rhizome » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 6:52 PM UTC

lghh wrote: post #288

rhizome wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that a majority of people are just absolutely manipulated by their emotions and dive head first into the feedback loop designed by social media to provide an addictive stream of never-ending engagement. Wow, harsh. My sense is that the problem is that these other sites are simply not very findable, and Google search results have been getting steadily and measurably worse over the last several years.

> Google search results have been getting steadily and measurably worse over the last several years I have an inclination to agree, but how is that measurable?

How many results with missing terms are high in the SERP, whether and how news entries[1] are in the SERPs, etc. Also, Google knows which page the result(s) you click on was on.

1. https://twitter.com/ericghill/status/987220242605617152

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#584

Post by PurpleBoxDragon » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 7:18 PM UTC

dwild wrote: post #471

pathseeker wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The thing is, you don’t really need to theorise about how to stop school shootings. It’s been done. It's still theorizing because there are no comparable countries to the US that have done it when it comes to the number of guns already out there (300+ million) and the importance of the 2nd amendment to many of the citizens. >It just required people to prioritise children’s lives over a minority hobby. If you see it…

> Would you also suggest banning protests in response to violence and death at protests because it's even more of a "minority hobby" than gun ownership? He didn't suggested banning, he suggested controlling them which is extremely different. I don't know for your country (but I'm pretty sure it's the same), but in mine protest are controlled too. You need to give your plan well in advance and it need to be approved f…

>He didn't suggested banning, he suggested controlling them which is extremely different.

And which is the next step for someone who does want to ban it. At least in the US the discussion has reached the point where one side no longer trusts the intentions of the other side, so anything that could eventually help a ban (such as a registry) is seem as being for the purpose of eventually helping a ban. This isn't without reason either, given that many past compromises are now seen as not enough and begun being presented as errors in previous laws that need to be fixed.

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#585

Post by PurpleBoxDragon » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 7:19 PM UTC

aplummer wrote: post #551

leereeves wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've already tried to ban guns in (many) cities while allowing them outside those cities. Criminals just leave the city to buy guns. Now people in cities want to solve that by forbidding people outside the cities from owning guns.

Nobody in any sane country has or city has banned guns. It’s just regulation like cars or planes or doing electrical work or cutting up fugu

At least for cars there is no regulation. Using them on public property (public roads) has certain regulations, but not for use on private property.

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#586

Post by lambdadmitry » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 7:21 PM UTC

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #403

skybrian wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some programmers see a problem and say "I know, I'll add federation". Now you have 7 problems. More seriously, I'm not seeing how federation solves any social network problem better than subreddits did? In either case, the quality of the discussion will depend on the moderators, who can be good, bad, or evil.

Federated social networks give you the ability to change allegiance or fork. Don't like a particular moderator on an instance? Leave to another instance, or start your own. Things can get problematic if other instances refuse to federate your own, but if you maintain even a bit of social capital, most instances will not block an instance with a single user. There's a growing culture (and a set of actions in the ecosy…

But that's not good enough per the article. The guy advocates for active moderation, for surveilling users and making sure they are "good" enough. I guess the interviewee would argue that federation is bad because you can't ban people and control the "toxicity" that way.

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#587

Post by seunosewa » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 7:34 PM UTC

TearsInTheRain wrote: post #402

seunosewa wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that guns are designed to cause deaths. Cars are not designed to be in accidents.

Imho, I don't think that that matters. Guns have plenty of legitimate, beneficial, and legal uses. Sure it is easy to use them illegally, but similarly it is also easy to use a car illegally, so I think my analogy still stands.

Aren’t car manufacturers allowed to be sued if their cars cause deaths?

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#588

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 8:21 PM UTC

camgunz wrote: post #559

naasking wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The extreme right is deeply racist/homophobic/sexist, denies science, advocates for a theocracy and for the shutting down of government services to the extent that millions of people will die. Would you like me to point you to the videos of extreme left protests assaulting professors on campuses for wanting to host an open debate on topics they find offensive? Or videos on extreme left protestors trying to shut dow…

> I can also show you the recent amendments to the Ontario law in which it is now illegal to not use non-gendered pronouns. No need, I'm familiar with it. Here's what they themselves say about it: --- Is it a violation of the Code to not address people by their choice of pronoun? The law recognizes that everyone has the right to self-identify their gender and that “misgendering” is a form of discrimination. As one hu…

[deleted]

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#589

Post by jessaustin » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 8:35 PM UTC

abritinthebay wrote: post #580

jessaustin wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I post here a lot and my posts get downvoted and upvoted a lot. I don't see any "gaming mechanics", whatever that is. If you have a reason to believe that stuff is happening, please share that with the rest of us. Also, you overstate this "compatibility". For humans, loss hurts more than gain feels good. Voting with negative as well as positive reinforcement is simply more effective at changing comment styles.

I think you might be confused as to what I meant by gaming mechanics. I'm not positing a vast network of deliberate bots or bad actors or anything. I'm talking about gaming in the abstract psychological and problem theory sense.

Yes I'm very confused but since you can't explain I won't worry about it.

Re: ‘I Fundamentally Believe That My Time at Reddit Made the World a Worse Place’

#590

Post by naasking » Fri, Apr 20, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

camgunz wrote: post #582

naasking wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure there have been cases where someone didn't deserve to be fired Also, I just wanted to note that I don't really buy into this argument. I don't see why someone "deserves to be fired" for their political views, no matter how racist, as long as they don't let their views impact the performance of their duties. So the Kim Davis' of the world absolutely deserve to be fired, but the plethora of other examples I…

> I don't see why someone "deserves to be fired" for their political views, no matter how racist, as long as they don't let their views impact the performance of their duties. I agree if by "political views" you mean things like monetary policy or foreign policy. But I personally couldn't ask women to work with people who think they shouldn't be in the workplace, or LGBT people to work with people who think they're i…

> But I personally couldn't ask women to work with people who think they shouldn't be in the workplace, or LGBT people to work with people who think they're irredeemable abominations, or people of color to work with people who think they're inferior because of their race.

I understand the distaste, but as long as they don't actually harass, abuse or otherwise mistreat them, what's the real problem here? That you don't like their thoughts? Are we policing people's thoughts now?

> I don't really classify them as political views.

Fine, cultural views, philosophical views, the game doesn't matter because you change the words. If you were working with someone from another culture, say, Saudi Arabia, you'd make allowances for cultural differences. Right and left really are different cultural perspectives, and your position is that we should make no allowances here simply because we were all raised geographically close to each other, despite our cultural differences. Or you're saying we can make some allowances, but not others, but then I would ask, why those allowances specifically?

> It's not hard to find someone saying something offensive. I do think it's a shame that otherwise good people are caught up in stuff like this.

But why the focus only on good people? My point is that harassing even the bad people just drives them further into a badder circle that will take them in and shelter them, because they see themselves as victimized. Whether they're right or wrong is immaterial, because it ultimately leads to more polarization, not understanding and reconciliation.

I think you're focusing too much on "bigotry against conservatives" as some kind of wrong in and of itself, the way you view bigotry against the historically oppressed, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that bigotry of any kind probably yields just more bigotry, and eliminating bigotry can only be achieved by exposure and intermingling among people with differences. If you're continually driving away people who initially hate you, they will simply continue to hate you, instead of coming to see you as a person.