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

The Internet of Beefs

ribbonfarm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 342 posts

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#281

Post by henrygrew »

apatters wrote: post #248
DoreenMichele wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, yet, here you are talking with other people all over the world for free. Someone older than me, of the hippie generation, once said to me "There were like three TV channels and they went off the air at 10pm. If you were still awake after that, there was nothing to do but sex and drugs." I strongly suspect the 24/7 availability of free entertainment, live online discussion, etc is a large contributing factor to t…

Why do you think the celibacy rate has risen sharply in young men over the last decade, but remained constant in young women? They both have access to the same entertainment options.

Because of the blue pill red pill movement and incel culture

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#282

Post by henrygrew »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #91
Lammy wrote: post #12

This article resonates with me and my experiences online to a startling degree. Specifically: “We are not beefing endlessly because we do not desire peace or because we do not know how to engineer peace. We are beefing because we no longer know who we are, each of us individually, and collectively as a species.” I think we are seeing a genuine lack of strong family, social, and organizational ties among most people,…

Trust is earned. It's not something you can assume. That "assumption of trust" you speak of included an assumption that either you weren't LGBT or you would bury it your entire life for the comfort of the larger community. Matthew 10:34-36 34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against…

>If the world is seeing a loss of identity, it is because we are being freed from the shackles of our old identity. It's normal for there to be a transition period where no one knows what's what.

What if this old identity and social structures based on religious texts is essential for human beings and human beings are not capable of forging for themselves a new identity without guidance?

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#283

Post by fallous »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #232
fallous wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly understand the attraction of a simplification of engagement and for decades I thought that was the true potential of the Internet (via usenet, IRC, later web forums, social networks, etc etc). I'm no longer convinced. The reason I'm no longer convinced is that such simplification carries with it a component of convenience that makes it awfully easy to isolate ourselves from those who may differ from our t…

I certainly understand the attraction of a simplification of engagement Because of the context of what you are replying to, this comes awfully close to implying that women should politely endure routine sexual assault for some reason. I assume that wasn't your intent. But I didn't engage with your comment earlier because I have no idea how to take your point seriously and respect your point of view without inadverten…

If that had been my intent, I would have said so.

Your statements "I might feel differently if I could find better intellectual engagement in meat space than online. If the entire internet were vapid memes, I might be all "Book club here I come!" (or whatever)" presumably do not imply that if the internet were more vapid you would politely endure routine sexual assault for better intellectual engagement either.

My reply was specifically about the problems of the internet as a replacement for meatspace intellectual engagement.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#284

Post by dTal »

henrygrew wrote: post #281
apatters wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the celibacy rate has risen sharply in young men over the last decade, but remained constant in young women? They both have access to the same entertainment options.

Because of the blue pill red pill movement and incel culture

I think you've got cause and effect mixed up there. "Incel" stands for "involuntary celibacy". That's not an explanation, that's a description of the thing you're trying to explain.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#285

Post by dTal »

philwelch wrote: post #266
apatters wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the celibacy rate has risen sharply in young men over the last decade, but remained constant in young women? They both have access to the same entertainment options.

I suspect it's because women can now be far more selective about the men they sleep with.

In a single word - Tinder.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#286

Post by DoreenMichele »

fallous wrote: post #283
DoreenMichele wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly understand the attraction of a simplification of engagement Because of the context of what you are replying to, this comes awfully close to implying that women should politely endure routine sexual assault for some reason. I assume that wasn't your intent. But I didn't engage with your comment earlier because I have no idea how to take your point seriously and respect your point of view without inadverten…

If that had been my intent, I would have said so. Your statements "I might feel differently if I could find better intellectual engagement in meat space than online. If the entire internet were vapid memes, I might be all "Book club here I come!" (or whatever)" presumably do not imply that if the internet were more vapid you would politely endure routine sexual assault for better intellectual engagement either. My re…

presumably do not imply that if the internet were more vapid you would politely endure routine sexual assault for better intellectual engagement either.

I didn't quite know how to say what I wanted to say, but that is, in fact, not too different from what I was implying. Not that I would politely endure routine sexual assault, but I would be much more willing to take my chances if I had no means to get my intellectual needs met without being exposed to such dangers.

I don't think I should have to be exposed to such dangers to get my intellectual needs met, but some comments here seem to suggest that me wanting to both get my intellectual needs met and not be subjected to sexual harassment is some kind of crazy high ridiculous standard.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#287

Post by octocop »

The internet is a large amplification device, everyone single expressed feeling or thought is amplified to be the most important topic of our time. Including this post and my comment, people should stop being so serious and enjoy living.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#288

Post by abdullahkhalids »

zweep wrote: post #250
aristophenes wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is amazing. I didn't get into it until a couple years ago, I was missing so much. Many of the most influential, intelligent, thoughtful people post what they think or are interested in. In the past, unless they were a journalist, you'd have to wait for someone to write a book, and then buy it. Now you can pick and choose from the most amazing people of the world, and actually interact with them. I kind of can…

Can you recommend 10-20 people to follow?

You can look at the 138 people I follow: https://twitter.com/abdullahkhalids

I have a strict policy of only following people with a high signal to noise ratio (with a few exceptions). I follow only a few friends (and they don't tweet anyway). I unfollow anyone who tweets too much. I use the "don't show retweets" option for anyone who retweets random crap. I also use the "muted words" feature to get rid of political tweets. I myself only tweet things I would want to read 5 years from now.

If there was an easy way, I would write additional filters per person to mute their annoying pet peeves.

My nomination for highest signal to noise ratio is https://twitter.com/michael_nielsen

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#289

Post by shrimpx »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #254
codebolt wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That "assumption of trust" you speak of included an assumption that either you weren't LGBT or you would bury it your entire life for the comfort of the larger community. The LGBT community comes with it's own shackles. They assume the only natural thing is for someone to structure their whole identity and lives around what might just be a developmental phase of their youth. I'm certainly glad that type of thinking…

I'm not heterosexual. The LGBT community has made it crystal clear they want nothing whatsoever to do with me. I don't speak for that community. My remark in no way suggests that their agenda is somehow superior to that of the Catholic Church.

There are a bunch of LGBT communities with varying sizes and standards.

Re: The Internet of Beefs

#290

Post by antepodius »

JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #122
rriepe wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is the same amount of religious in my experience. The people who join an established religion gain the quality of being predictable.

I really don't see that one. There are people willing to drink poison for their cult - I don't see that level of religious fervour from the vast majority of people. People who join an established religion also vary wildly. Gangsters and pedophiles sit next to soccer mums and librarians at church services. I don't see the predictability or religious-(ity) being at all normalised.

And notional atheists crusade for political positions with equal fervour. I think what he meant is that there's a probability distribution of religiosity among the populace, and the curves aren't too different within and without churches.
Post reply on HN