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?

#441

Post by enobrev » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

pnako wrote: post #402

deepspace wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counterpoint to that is that allowing platforms for toxic views to exist and grow (a) "normalizes" these views and (b) makes it very easy for them to recruit new members, since they have a "legitimate" platform to spread their hate from. Personally I am fine with them isolating themselves in cesspools like Voat. While they are not being exposed to contrary views there, they are also not exposing large amounts of…

Isolation / segregation / echo chamber (whatever you want to call it) is amplifying toxicity. We used to socialize in the streets, in the marketplace, in towns. Maybe the town's butcher was known to be a bit of a racist hick, but he was still a decent shopkeeper and his kids went to the same school as yours, so you tolerated his antics. There was the town slut, the town's drunk, the guy who was a known communist symp…

...with _only_ people exactly like them.

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

#442

Post by qwerty456127 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

Rational thinking, manipulation techniques (you have to know them to be able to detect them), emotional awareness and stuff like that should be taught at every school. Everybody should be conscious of the fact 99% of what you find online (let alone see on TV) is bullshit, designed to troll and manipulate you and absolutely not worth taking serious (and if something really seems important - check the proofs and don't forget to question their legitimacy). I would even call for the governments to fund efforts to educate every person (adults included) this way - this clearly is a matter of national security nowadays.

I believe there is no sane way (an insane way is to deanonymize and watch everyone - China and Russia implement this) to stop the polarization/toxicicity in the first place, all we can do is develop immunity.

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

#443

Post by pnako » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:56 PM UTC

marbletiles wrote: post #427

kerkeslager wrote: post #359

I don't know if I know the solution, but I know one thing that isn't the solution: silencing everyone who disagrees with you. A lot of the people complaining about "toxicity" on the internet seem to be under the impression that if we "deplatform" the so-called toxic people, that will fix things. But on the contrary, that makes things worse. If someone says something awful on the internet, and everyone either ignores…

The data suggests that deplatforming works. Milo; Katie Hopkins; InfoWars et al have all lost their former agenda-setting influence following deplatforming. And studies have shown that banning hate sub-Reddits does _not_ cause that content to “pop up elsewhere”, it causes it to decline overall. It’s important to remember too there are incentives for people to argue and behave otherwise: FB, Twitter, hate-speech monge…

Would we still have a pro-vax problem if FB banned it across its properties?

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

#444

Post by chrisseaton » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

marbletiles wrote: post #427

kerkeslager wrote: post #359

I don't know if I know the solution, but I know one thing that isn't the solution: silencing everyone who disagrees with you. A lot of the people complaining about "toxicity" on the internet seem to be under the impression that if we "deplatform" the so-called toxic people, that will fix things. But on the contrary, that makes things worse. If someone says something awful on the internet, and everyone either ignores…

The data suggests that deplatforming works. Milo; Katie Hopkins; InfoWars et al have all lost their former agenda-setting influence following deplatforming. And studies have shown that banning hate sub-Reddits does _not_ cause that content to “pop up elsewhere”, it causes it to decline overall. It’s important to remember too there are incentives for people to argue and behave otherwise: FB, Twitter, hate-speech monge…

If you de-platform people they still think the way that they think, you just don't see what they're thinking and have no ability to challenge it.

Then they turn up and vote...

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

#445

Post by kabouseng » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

kabouseng wrote: post #408

oneplane wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen that definition anywhere, or a definition like that for any other specific word.

This might sound mean because it is text, but it isn't, it's just answering your question. But the word (actually term) you're looking for is social justice warrior.

>>In reply to child post by oneplane

Hey welcome to the culture war :D The trick is not to take it too seriously. Also South park is an amazing resource / commentary on it... :D

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

#446

Post by lukaszkups » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

I was thinking about a solution that could be implemented by big players like Disqus - I've took some ideas from StackOverflow reputation idea - here you can read about it: https://lukaszkups.net/notes/what-disqus-can-learn-from-stac...

&tldr; limit comments per day, require minimum amount of positive reputation to leave a comment, make it customizable per website by its owners.

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

#447

Post by mpalmer » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #401

kerkeslager wrote: post #359

I don't know if I know the solution, but I know one thing that isn't the solution: silencing everyone who disagrees with you. A lot of the people complaining about "toxicity" on the internet seem to be under the impression that if we "deplatform" the so-called toxic people, that will fix things. But on the contrary, that makes things worse. If someone says something awful on the internet, and everyone either ignores…

But the average left-leaning person today doesn't see bigots even as people any more. I spend the bulk of my time studying extremist discourse and communities. Extremist bigots take it as read that people of the wrong ethnic/religious/political group are either not people or at best inferior people, and direct their efforts to promoting those views, planning how to eliminate those they dislike, and normalizing that b…

Why is this suddenly a discussion about extremism? Not everyone who is bigoted is an extremist, but maybe it's easier for you to argue as though this is the case.

> Extremist bigots take it as read that people of the wrong [...] group are either not people or at best inferior people, and direct their efforts to promoting those views, planning how to eliminate those they dislike, and normalizing that behavior.

Funny, this is a pretty good description of cancel culture. "Warning" and "complaining" is one thing, but advocating for the complete social and professional ostracization of people for increasingly arbitrary reasons is happening, and has been happening. _That_ sounds like extremism to me.

Assuming constant bad faith on the part of people, _most_ of whom don't have any control over the views they hold, is not how this problem gets solved.

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

#448

Post by krapp » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #431

(a) Bigotry is already normalized in the United States. The president is a bigot and almost half the country voted for him. This is another negative effect of deplatforming: if you live in a liberal city and only frequent Reddit/Facebook, you live in an echo chamber where you don't have any visibility into what's normal. (b) The legitimacy of a platform is based on what is said there, not the other way around. You vi…

>The president is a bigot and almost half the country voted for him

That's not entirely true. About half of the pool of eligible voters who participated in the election voted for Trump[0], but they accounted for around 20% of the population[1].

Not that I disagree about bigotry being normalized in the US, it has been since the founding of the country. But I think the evidence of that isn't Trump's election so much as Trump even making it to the primary. His election, arguably, came about due to a system designed to meet the interests of the parties, and not the will of people at large.

[0]https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-eligible-voters-vot...

[1]https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-the-population-vote...

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

#449

Post by tnel77 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

I won’t act like I have the answer, but I do have a complaint about the state of our news sources (specifically focused on the USA).

A lot of people like to throw around the term “fake news” when they see an article from the news source that is opposite their side of the aisle. While fake news does exist, CNN and Fox News are not fake news. They produce heavily biased news. There is a major difference. While both news sources have been caught lying before, both of them are usually telling the truth. It may only be half of the truth and purposely mislead the viewer, but that doesn’t mean the information being shared is fake or false.

I’m relatively young so I don’t know if there has ever been anything remotely close to “unbiased news,” but just presenting the public with facts that aren’t tarnished by bias would go a long way to helping people become more informed and, potentially, less worked up.

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

#450

Post by gotoeleven » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #431

(a) Bigotry is already normalized in the United States. The president is a bigot and almost half the country voted for him. This is another negative effect of deplatforming: if you live in a liberal city and only frequent Reddit/Facebook, you live in an echo chamber where you don't have any visibility into what's normal. (b) The legitimacy of a platform is based on what is said there, not the other way around. You vi…

What did he do to call him a bigot? Enforcing immigration laws? Banning travel from countries where we can't vet people properly? Declining to have the military pay for people's sexual reassignment surgeries? Not letting people on welfare earn citizenship? Restricting a refugee system that was being abused?

One of the sources of polarization is that the definition of hate and racism and bigotry seems to be broad and expanding on the left, while on the right it is narrow and static.