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

I Am Deleting the Blog

slatestarcodex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#521

Post by frogpelt »

yters wrote: post #504
raxxorrax wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This self censorship is most often meant when someone criticizes political correctness. It doesn't mean that you should unnecessarily put people off with inflammatory language. But I think it could still get you fired if posted on Twitter, at least a few years ago. Some people with especially large incomes seem to be immune though.

Hah, yes, like JK Rowling! If you are a self made billionaire, you are pretty immune from the twitter mobs, and can make controversial statements such as "there are only two genders."

Ask yourself why is that opinion considered controversial?

Are you living in a bubble?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#522

Post by finnthehuman »

nojs wrote: post #438
gringoDan wrote: post #394

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…

Where can one go to learn these controversial truths? I would love to see a list of these facts that apparently only insiders can talk about. Are they literally so confronting/offensive that they don’t exist on the internet?

>Where can one go to learn these controversial truths?

Bits and pieces are strewn all over the place. But you have learn to separate the wheat from the chaff for yourself. Then you might start noticing the places with limited quantities of slightly more observant commentary.

>Are they literally so confronting/offensive that they don’t exist on the internet?

No, they just don't exist on the internet the same way most real conversations don't exist on the internet. The internet is great for information of the type that would be found in traditional publications, is of professional interest, or are marketing materials. It sucks for everything else.

People being real exist in very small quantities, usually on lighter topics to avoid exposing themselves, and are always outnumbered by people preforming for the audience or (untempered by people openly talking like reasonable people) have taken an extreme position on the topic.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#523

Post by enraged_camel »

dlkf wrote: post #491
artsyca wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this forum is exactly this. How often have I self censored because I just don't want the downvotes?

This feels like an instance of negativity-bias. If you're willing to self-censor to avoid downvotes shouldn't you also be willing to shill / virtue signal for upvotes? My problem with downvotes isn't the effect on my score. It's the fact that the font becomes paler. Dissenting opinions are singled out in a way that makes them look bad/wrong. I also don't like how the UX doesn't represent the distribution. A post with…

Yes, this is the worst aspect of HN's design in my opinion: the paler font is essentially the equivalent of silencing dissent.

What is worse, it is an entirely silent way of silencing dissent. I would love to experiment with the other end of the spectrum: not only should the number of downvotes be visible, downvoting someone should also require a reason to be given, in the form of a post. And it should be possible to downvote those reasons too, with the algorithm adjusting the original downvote's weight based on the score of the downvote reason.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#524

Post by jahaja »

phyzome wrote: post #505
jahaja wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Harassing? Investigative?

> Harassing?

What do you expect to happen when this kind of crowd ("rationalists") calls or mail-spam a journalist that's "attacking" their idol?

> Investigative?

Ok, just journalist then, does it matter?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#525

Post by sbuttgereit »

entropyneur wrote: post #495
gringoDan wrote: post #394

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…

I love "What You Can't Say" and have incorporated the conformist test into my moral compass. But I think the shift to use of shame for society regulation is a positive development. I'd much rather be downvoted on HN or called names on Twitter than beaten up or deprived of freedom. But maybe that's just me.

Luckily, one can never lead to the other.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#526

Post by entropyneur »

DuskStar wrote: post #513
entropyneur wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love "What You Can't Say" and have incorporated the conformist test into my moral compass. But I think the shift to use of shame for society regulation is a positive development. I'd much rather be downvoted on HN or called names on Twitter than beaten up or deprived of freedom. But maybe that's just me.

> I'd much rather be downvoted on HN or called names on Twitter than beaten up or deprived of freedom. This blog post is literally about someone fearing that it'll escalate to "beaten up" or "fired" if their name is published.

Yeah, my comment was only in reference to this subthread.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#527

Post by raxxorrax »

yters wrote: post #504
raxxorrax wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This self censorship is most often meant when someone criticizes political correctness. It doesn't mean that you should unnecessarily put people off with inflammatory language. But I think it could still get you fired if posted on Twitter, at least a few years ago. Some people with especially large incomes seem to be immune though.

Hah, yes, like JK Rowling! If you are a self made billionaire, you are pretty immune from the twitter mobs, and can make controversial statements such as "there are only two genders."

It is a matter of definition and she is probably wrong if academic definitions apply, but yes, that is one prominent mob. There are others of course. If you think that these dissections were meant to free yourself from expectations, it is kind of ironic to have a twitter mob coming after you for wrong opinions. Completely defeats the purpose and then some.

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#528

Post by boltzmann_ »

If you have not read Scott Alexander blog posts before I only can say you are missing out of an internet gem. Some personal favorites: - Meditations On Moloch - I can tolerate anything except the outgroup

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#529

Post by mcculley »

I am confused about how the New York Times and journalism in general treats the pseudonymous and anonymous. I am continually annoyed at how often articles use unnamed "sources close to" a matter. It fosters a culture of government unaccountability. But the post says that it is "New York Times policy to include real names". Are there some subtle rules involved here that are not obvious to me?

Re: I Am Deleting the Blog

#530

Post by cm2187 »

gringoDan wrote: post #394

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…

For me rather the film Good Night, and Good Luck (2005), we are going through the McCarty years again.
Post reply on HN