Live data from Hacker News

I Am Deleting the Blog

slatestarcodex.com

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#481
post #411
post #36

If you're pissed off by this, as I am, here's how the author politely suggests that you direct your support: > There is no comments section for this post. The appropriate comments section is the feedback page of the New York Times. You may also want to email the New York Times technology editor Pui-Wing Tam at pui-wing.tam@nytimes.com, contact her on Twitter at @puiwingtam, or phone the New York Times at 844-NYTNEWS…

Do you guys really feel that you're on the right side of history by harassing an investigative journalist?

In short: yes.

To expand: nobody here is harassing the journalist. The journalist harassed the blogger. The commenters are providing polite, critical feedback.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#482
post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it has the feel of the religious witch hunt because that is exactly what is has become. Many of these groups no longer look at data or science or any empirical evidence for the basis of their positions or policy, it is pure emotional dogma at this point. They are non-theistic religions

Scott’s “Meditations on Moloch” is a good summary of the underlying issue. It’s too bad I can’t provide a link.

[deleted]

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#483
Isn't this a double standard? The NYT was one of the many papers that decided not to publish the name of the whistleblower in the Trump-Ukraine scandal. They published many articles on the scandal and his name is definitely known to them as they did a profile on the wistleblower without naming him and he has been named by the president's son and many others in government (and no, he was not a source for the NYT. He was a whistleblower who went through official channels to blow the whistle, he didn't go to the press).

I am not going to post his name here as it tends to get comments deleted. Youtube will even automatically delete your comment if it contains his name (maybe even relieving his gender goes too far, I guess we will find out). If anyone doubts this you can just try it yourself. Or just believe the company's own spokesperson https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/08/tech/facebook-whistleblower-n...

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#484
post #143

Never trust a journalist - they are not in it to educate or inform, but rather for their own self-interest and celebrity.

All Journalists Are Bastards (In precisely the same sense as All Cops Are Bastards, namely that they have a job which purports to be in the public interest, but which is highly distorted by a bunch of societal factors and mostly winds up serving powerful interests. Any given interaction with a journalist/cop has a chance of going badly, and if it does go badly you can be damn sure that you're going to the one that su…

I actually think there's quite a strong parallel. Both are necessary to the proper functioning of a society in small amounts, and large amounts of either go hand-in-hand with societal dysfunction.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#485

Reading this made me think of two essays I've recently revisited. 1. The Sound of Silence, by Jessica Livingston Three years ago she argued that the smartest people are silencing themselves because the downside risk of being attacked for (misinterpretations of) their opinions are too high. People are wary of sharing useful information outside of trusted circles, which serves to consolidate power with insiders – those…

That made me think of an essay I often revisit, Emerson's Self-Reliance (1841):

Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist. ... For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure. And therefore a man must know how to estimate a sour face. The by-standers look askance on him in the public street or in the friend's parlour. If this aversation had its origin in contempt and resistance like his own, he might well go home with a sad countenance; but the sour faces of the multitude, like their sweet faces, have no deep cause, but are put on and off as the wind blows and a newspaper directs. Yet is the discontent of the multitude more formidable than that of the senate and the college. It is easy enough for a firm man who knows the world to brook the rage of the cultivated classes. Their rage is decorous and prudent, for they are timid as being very vulnerable themselves. But when to their feminine rage the indignation of the people is added, when the ignorant and the poor are aroused, when the unintelligent brute force that lies at the bottom of society is made to growl and mow, it needs the habit of magnanimity and religion to treat it godlike as a trifle of no concernment. ...

The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency... Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.—'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.'—Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#486
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disengaging based on an N=1 is not the type of individual action that improves our society. Our society is built on individual (and collective) attempts to improve, and you putting your money towards journalists you found to be doing a good job is the way we leave the world better than we found it. I hope you'll consider this, because our society cannot function without quality investigative reporting. I of course ag…

And there's the rub. What is "quality investigative reporting" in an objective sense, when most of the MSM outlets are owned by oligarchs, or simply "toe the line"? In theory I would gladly support the theory of "quality investigative reporting", but the reality is a propagandist machine where opinion pieces replaces actual unbiased, adjective-free objective news. Some examples of "oligarch news": https://www.youtube…

IMO we need some kind of data driven media/data driven reporting/data driven newspaper type thing.

Then we can have reporting/debate/conversation on the meaning of the data but without the filters we use to have in place all reporting has essentially become meaningless, untrustworthy, opinion pieces.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#487
I'm sure that blog has been archived somewhere pretty hard to just delete stuff from the internet. Take for instance this website I use an RSS feed aggregator to pull the top stories out of this site and put them on my feed within the last year I would say most of the stories are flagged removed basically somebody trying to remove a certain opinion.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#488

Reading this made me think of two essays I've recently revisited. 1. The Sound of Silence, by Jessica Livingston Three years ago she argued that the smartest people are silencing themselves because the downside risk of being attacked for (misinterpretations of) their opinions are too high. People are wary of sharing useful information outside of trusted circles, which serves to consolidate power with insiders – those…

Paul's post has always felt like a wordy defense of the "well, actually".

Lots of us passionate techies like to weigh in on every topic and forget that not everything is academic. Sometimes the world doesn't need to hear our opinion. That doesn't mean we're being censored.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but what does this have to do with the thread? Scott isn't being silenced, he's shutting down his blog out of concern that his relationship with his patients may be jeopardized if they could look him up on the NYT. (Whether he's justified I'm not qualified to say as I'm not a psychiatrist.) What's the hidden truth, controversial opinion or super secret insight at stake here?

The point I was trying to make is tangential, but related to the post. Scott has created one of the most thoughtful, level-headed, and interesting places on the internet. And yet he's shutting it down because it has led to a huge downside risk for his personal and professional life: > I also worry that my clinic would decide I am more of a liability than an asset and let me go, which would leave hundreds of patients…

But this is not about his opinions or that they are not accepted. This is about maintaining pseudonym and importance of it for practising MD.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#490

I'm sure that blog has been archived somewhere pretty hard to just delete stuff from the internet. Take for instance this website I use an RSS feed aggregator to pull the top stories out of this site and put them on my feed within the last year I would say most of the stories are flagged removed basically somebody trying to remove a certain opinion.

Author dives into this in the post a bit, it's more about how would the NYT write the article about a blog that's no longer there without having to explain their part of poisoning the story. They also talk about prior run-ins with doxing and people calling their practice to try to get them fired off reddit witchhunts, so I think they know this, it's all about preventing a NYT-sized catastrophe when they've already seen low-yield reddit-sized explosions.
Post reply on HN