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

De-escalating social media conflict

nickpunt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 350 posts

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#311

Post by fzeroracer »

brigandish wrote: post #280
foldr wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>BLM/white supremacist content means that Disney endorses violence/racism Are you trolling with this comparison? In a thread about de-escalation it seems a bit unwise to casually tie BLM to violence and suggest that it's somehow comparable to white supremacist extremism. I get that you were trying to choose one example from each 'end' of the political spectrum, but I think this particular choice was badly misconceive…

> Are you trolling with this comparison? How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please. > it seems a bit unwise to casually tie BLM to violence "unwise" reads like a threat at worst and a warning at best but since I've invoked good faith I'll accept it's poor wording… but what do you actually mean? Is disagreement with your view something that should be avoided on HN? Will the mob (is this what H…

> How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please.

You should really take your own advice considering you asked them to assume in good faith but then immediately prior did not assume good faith at all.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#312

Post by aebtebeten »

saagarjha wrote: post #304
aebtebeten wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea if https://dprktoday.com truly is[1] DPRK or someone else's black propaganda (nor do I read korean) but the pictures on it are congruent with those from former communist countries. New factory, with athletic courts (and maybe a stage/multipurpose hall?) for the workers: https://dprktoday.com/content/great/4/sajin/image/2020-05-02... Kids wearing red kerchiefs in botanic: https://dprktoday.com/photos/18…

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. If it's "DPRK is communist", you're not really doing that because nothing you mentioned has anything to do with communism.

I'm not trying to say "DPRK is communist", especially because I believe the Warsaw Pact countries considered themselves to be socialist, on the way to communism. What I am trying to say is that, of things that strike me as having been different between western and eastern europe in photographed culture, today's DPRK shows the same differences. So I'd consider it firmly in the "second world", insofar as that old cold war trichotomy makes any sense in the twenty-first century.

For instance, I consider "Девушки фабричные" to have been a soviet trope (an image search reveals factory girls existed in the west as well, but don't seem to have been so frequently propagandised) and sure enough, here they are in the DPRK, even clasically at textile machines:

https://dprktoday.com/content//photo/2020/20200309-pt17906-1...

https://dprktoday.com/content//photo/2020/20200112-pt17518-2...

(among the machines I spotted on the site is a mask-making machine. Covid is a common denominator this year.)

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#313

Post by mirimir »

wolco wrote: post #300
mirimir wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just how did they "prove" that? And just who is doing the "imposing" here?

Parent poster is the who. Proof can be found in the aggressive tone and imposing the opinion that only the right can be this way. Leave a little room for discussion.

Hey, it's just an opinion. And it's arguably not clear-cut. Or at least, the Wikipedia article doesn't think so.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#314

Post by throwingagain »

andrepd wrote: post #89
ssalazar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Engagement" is the "paper clip maximizer"[1] of the modern software industry, or more generally an example of "instrumental convergence." Optimizing engagement without regard for negative externalities is a catastrophic ethical failure of the major players in the software industry, and we are finally seeing a backlash both from mainstream advertisers and widespread public outcry. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In…

Why should a for-profit enterprise have any kind of ethical consideration at all? It seems that's your mistake.

Because externality is everywhere, and a society where organizations pay attention to this is preferable to one that suffers a thousand cuts by ignoring it.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#315

Post by mirimir »

saagarjha wrote: post #305
chinesempire wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Italian, with a grandfather imprisoned by the fascists and the other sent by the fascist regime to die in Russia, I can tell you what fascism is and what is not and I can tell you we never thought it meant "government that hurts people" like nazism is not just "people who wear swastikas", if you use it that way, you are wrong. My grandmother died few moths ago, she was from 1922 and escaped from the fascists on on…

That might be what it used to mean, but it certainly does not mean that now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#"Fascist"_as_a_pejorat... . You can call it wrong all you want, but the use of the word has been diluted enough that the meaning that you seek is not people believe when they use it.

Fair enough. So now it's just an insult.

But that doesn't mean that it's lost its actual meaning, when used professionally.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#316

Post by brigandish »

foldr wrote: post #281
brigandish wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you trolling with this comparison? How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please. > it seems a bit unwise to casually tie BLM to violence "unwise" reads like a threat at worst and a warning at best but since I've invoked good faith I'll accept it's poor wording… but what do you actually mean? Is disagreement with your view something that should be avoided on HN? Will the mob (is this what H…

>How long have you been on HN? Considerably longer than you, as you can easily tell by looking at my profile to see when my account was created. >"unwise" reads like a threat No, it doesn't. Don't be silly. >dare suggesting that BLM has been associated with violence or extremism Most large-scale protest movements attract violent extremists. There are always some violent idiots out there. The point is that BLM is a ma…

Yes it does, and if you’ve been here considerably longer than me then you should know the rules just as well, so try sticking to them. It is not trolling to point to the violence that follows BLM around or you wouldn’t need to produce an apologetic for it. Try the principle of charity and try not to tell others what they should think or write simply because you disagree.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#317

Post by brigandish »

fzeroracer wrote: post #311
brigandish wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you trolling with this comparison? How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please. > it seems a bit unwise to casually tie BLM to violence "unwise" reads like a threat at worst and a warning at best but since I've invoked good faith I'll accept it's poor wording… but what do you actually mean? Is disagreement with your view something that should be avoided on HN? Will the mob (is this what H…

> How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please. You should really take your own advice considering you asked them to assume in good faith but then immediately prior did not assume good faith at all.

I gave them the benefit of the doubt explicitly and reminded them of the rules - what more do you want?

Their reply shows I was wrong to give the benefit of the doubt and that they really need a reminder of the rules. Feel free to come up with more “no it’s you” replies if you like but they’re unhelpful, unwanted, unwarranted, and directed towards the wrong person.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#318

Post by ImaCake »

mistermann wrote: post #310
ImaCake wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is excellent. Tools like this get us close to the kind of granular democracy that our ancestors could only dream of.

An imperfect system for granular democracy could be built fairly easily, or bolted onto an existing system (Facebook has the largest global membership I'd think). There's nothing stopping anyone from building one (other than maybe reasonable fear of being suicided if it gets too much traction, etc), yet I don't think I've ever heard of anyone who's tried. It's so obviously useful that the lack of attempts almost seem…

There is an obscure party in Australia whose platform is to allow people to vote on every issue in parliament. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Direct_Democracy

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#319

Post by fzeroracer »

brigandish wrote: post #317
fzeroracer wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How long have you been on HN? Begin by assuming good faith, please. You should really take your own advice considering you asked them to assume in good faith but then immediately prior did not assume good faith at all.

I gave them the benefit of the doubt explicitly and reminded them of the rules - what more do you want? Their reply shows I was wrong to give the benefit of the doubt and that they really need a reminder of the rules. Feel free to come up with more “no it’s you” replies if you like but they’re unhelpful, unwanted, unwarranted, and directed towards the wrong person.

You should follow the rules when you're attempting to claim someone else is not following the rules.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#320

Post by ssalazar »

andrepd wrote: post #89
ssalazar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Engagement" is the "paper clip maximizer"[1] of the modern software industry, or more generally an example of "instrumental convergence." Optimizing engagement without regard for negative externalities is a catastrophic ethical failure of the major players in the software industry, and we are finally seeing a backlash both from mainstream advertisers and widespread public outcry. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In…

Why should a for-profit enterprise have any kind of ethical consideration at all? It seems that's your mistake.

Because corporations are not a natural entity and exist at the behest of society as a whole?

If that means nothing to you then read the link. Literally killing your own customers to make the line go up isn’t a sound business strategy.

Post reply on HN