Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#251

Post by TuringNYC » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

kody wrote: post #158

scottlocklin wrote: post #77

>I've noticed a huge uptick in the toxicity online in the last 5-7 years. You're crazy my dude(tte). I've been on the interbutts since 1991 and Usenet days, and it's exactly as it always was. The big difference is we have reporter ding dongs on Twitter thinking Twitter, aka the comments section they removed from their web presence, is the real world. Also old people on Facebook who never learned the lessons of being…

When reporters on Twitter freak out about the trolls on 4chan like it's some disease infecting our precious wholesome web, I can't help but remember (through my biased lenses of course) when most of the web (that I visited) looked like 4chan. What the folks who think the web is 'degrading' don't seem to realize is how much of a wild west it used to be, and how much corporations have tried to (and somewhat succeeded i…

>> When reporters on Twitter freak out about the trolls on 4chan like it's some disease infecting our precious wholesome web

Without making excuses for 4chan, perhaps the reporters should freak out about their own behavior first? So much of the news-media has an incredibly narrow focus, almost to be lying by omission. For a minority member of society, reporters are the 4-chan.

One of thousands of examples: https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-harvey-20170829-story.h...

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#252

Post by AnimalMuppet » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

TheFiend7 wrote: post #176

bjt2n3904 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ignoring them doesn't fix the problem. "The problem". What problem are we talking about again here? Is the problem that people are believing wrong things, or the spread of polarization and toxicity? I don't care if people believe "wrong things". How's that old song go? "All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest"? People will always believe whatever they want to, regardless…

Honestly that's somewhat nonsense. People don't just believe whatever they want to believe, education and diffusion of information has radically changed humanity over the last few centuries and you're fooling yourself if you think that somehow improved communication and discussions didn't drive that. Schools have improved reading and mathematical literacy of the general population, that isn't just some made up statis…

Yes... and also no.

Yes, people change their minds. But the more passionately they care about something, the less likely they are to change their minds about it. On the big questions that people care deeply about (politics, religion, vi vs. emacs), evidence doesn't seem to change peoples' ideas nearly as much as it should.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#253

Post by ticmasta » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

fragmede wrote: post #236

madaxe_again wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the same old same old. People used to heckle in theatres, because the audience lent them anonymity. Mobs are mobs because in a mob you are the mob. Lift the social contract by granting anonymity and we fairly instantaneously resort to slinging faeces at one another. I think the GP has nailed it, however - we are reporting theatre hecklers as news, and instead of watching the play, everyone is now watching the pu…

Anonymity isn’t it, or isn’t all of it. YouTube comments were deanonymized but that didn’t improve discourse. Look at Facebook and some of the “discussions” about politics there. Newspapers tried running comment sections, but either they’re a cesspool, real names or no, or they just gave up having comment sections entirely. Even locale isn’t a help - NextDoor is full of the same, or worse, combative vitriol. Sure, ch…

The deciding factor seems to be if the internet group (as in characteristics defining cohesion) has strong enough mores to demand acceptable conduct. wide-open commenting (anon or not): NO. Neighbourhood FB group: you'd hope so, but not always...

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#254

Post by noir_lord » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

scottlocklin wrote: post #77

>I've noticed a huge uptick in the toxicity online in the last 5-7 years. You're crazy my dude(tte). I've been on the interbutts since 1991 and Usenet days, and it's exactly as it always was. The big difference is we have reporter ding dongs on Twitter thinking Twitter, aka the comments section they removed from their web presence, is the real world. Also old people on Facebook who never learned the lessons of being…

BBS in the early nineties and internet mid-90's.

Always been a toxic element, it's just the echo chamber got louder to the point where it drowns out the normal people.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#255

Post by awb » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

nardi wrote: post #179

scottlocklin wrote: post #77

>I've noticed a huge uptick in the toxicity online in the last 5-7 years. You're crazy my dude(tte). I've been on the interbutts since 1991 and Usenet days, and it's exactly as it always was. The big difference is we have reporter ding dongs on Twitter thinking Twitter, aka the comments section they removed from their web presence, is the real world. Also old people on Facebook who never learned the lessons of being…

Yes, the internet’s always been toxic, but the audience has changed. It used to be a small subset of the world population that had the money, time, and know-how to get on the internet. Now it’s the entire world, and it seems to me that the average media-consumption sophistication has gone way down. Trolls used to be a smaller fraction of the whole, and easier to ignore. Now, the signal-to-troll ratio is all out of wh…

> It used to be a small subset of the world population that had the money, time, and know-how to get on the internet. Now it’s the entire world

This. It's not that polarization and toxic ideas didn't exist, it was arguably much worse in the past with slavery, genocide, etc.

You had entire countries publicly advocating for violent racism and citing sources that they claimed supported their views. It's pretty harsh to call us post-truth but not them. Their lies led to brutal consequences for millions.

And it used to be the media was a pretty strict funnel (pre-Internet, pre-TV) where you had to be interesting to someone with power like a politician or an editor to get mass exposure for your ideas. Everyone else was relegated to preaching in the park. Now, we have virtual parks (websites) and preaching can reach millions.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#256

Post by kgwxd » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

A bunch of personal rules I try to be conscious of, but usually break: Respond/listen to ideas, not people. Try for a top-level quality comment instead of a reply. If a reply makes better sense, don't direct it at the person. Minimize the use of names, personal pronouns, partisan terms, adjectives, and adverbs.

It's probably already been attempted, but a forum that had some understanding of language structure and could programmatically provide some feedback by adding a "Review" step to posting would be interesting. The system would have full access to the context a post is being made in and checks could be built around it. The less checks that are ignored, the better the rank.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#257

Post by swampangel » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

devmunchies wrote: post #224

eropple wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shitlords don't just "meme". They radicalize themselves and others. I had a friend ask to crash on my couch during GamerGate because a guy on 4chan took a picture of himself with a knife in front of her apartment building and it's the people who aren't shitlords who are the problem here? What's your proposed "immune system" response to that, exactly? Or to an Elliot Rodgers, he who was cheered on by exactly this crow…

this whole thread has nothing to do with real world threats of physical violence. online trolling is different than your extreme example.

If 10 people on the internet tell you they want to kill you, how do you tell if 1 of them is serious and is actually going to show up physically?

The answer is that you can't, and there isn't a firm line where all trolling is on one side and harassing/violent behaviour is something different.

Many of us can heuristically decide that trollish behaviour aimed at us won't extend to our person/home/workplace, and doesn't need to be taken seriously. That doesn't mean it's a rule for everyone or an excuse for that behaviour.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#258

Post by Jamwinner » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:41 PM UTC

eropple wrote: post #170

devmunchies wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the AOL instant messenger days and people being super derogatory and vulgar for kicks. Even xbox live of 2007 was just as vulgar as today. I don't think its that the internet is more toxic, its that we are more sensitive (more easily offended). A strong immune system is the best defense. If it rolls off your back, is it really toxic?

Shitlords don't just "meme". They radicalize themselves and others. I had a friend ask to crash on my couch during GamerGate because a guy on 4chan took a picture of himself with a knife in front of her apartment building and it's the people who aren't shitlords who are the problem here? What's your proposed "immune system" response to that, exactly? Or to an Elliot Rodgers, he who was cheered on by exactly this crow…

That esclated quickly. I think your extreme examples are not really the norm, nor an accurate representation in general. This just makes the radicalization worse.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#259

Post by ianai » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:41 PM UTC

abootstrapper wrote: post #241

Not all actors are participating in online conversations in good faith. Meaning, a big part of the problem are trolls and propagandist antagonizing and encouraging division. Part of the solution has to be stopping them.

Lots of other comments here say it’s just the old trolls at scale, but I agree with you. There is propaganda at such a scale that it’s hard to miss and some is very hard to spot. I don’t remember people in the US being so likely to repeat Russian propaganda in the past. I routinely have people repeat Russian-twisted, false accounts of historical facts to me! This isn’t the old problems at scale.

Edit-just this morning the news reports Republican senators being afraid for their families well beings if they counter Trump. Unthinkable just 4 years ago.

Re: Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

#260

Post by AnimalMuppet » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 6:42 PM UTC

gbrown wrote: post #88

tengbretson wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might find that the people you see posting and repeating these lies see the things that you post and repeat as lies.

They frequently do see things in that way - and they're wrong. In fact, they're worse than wrong, because many people see the dueling assertions of fact and give up on knowing the truth of a situation altogether. This is a classic disinformation technique. We do have the ability to determine truth from fiction, it just takes more work than cynically throwing up your hands and smugly concluding all sides are lying.

> We do have the ability to determine truth from fiction, it just takes more work than cynically throwing up your hands and smugly concluding all sides are lying.

It also takes more work than "But I'm right!"

If you've done the research, if you know that you're correct, it's one thing. (Even then, not everyone who is incorrect is lying.) But it's a real temptation to say "I'm right, they're wrong, they're lying" when you haven't actually done the work to be sure you're right.

I am prone to that temptation. You almost certainly are, too. So be careful. You can be the one in the wrong.