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

Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 584 posts

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#81

Post by fzeroracer »

twic wrote: post #61
mrkurt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My last name is easy to find. My first name is Kurt, I live in Chicago, I work on startups. I've published with my last name within the last decade. Scott Alexander's last name is also easy to find. His first name is Scott, his middle name is Alexander, he's a psychiatrist, and he lives in Michigan. This is all information he publicized. And he has also published under his last name, even on SSC, within the last deca…

Scott Alexander wasn't worried about readers of Slate Star Codex finding out his real name, he was worried about patients who knew his real name finding Slate Star Codex. Using a pseudonym on the blog was a reasonably effective trapdoor function.

Isn't he effectively doxxing his patients by revealing personal information (albeit slightly jumbled)? He's been writing under the thinnest veneer of anonymity and if he's considered about the things he writes affecting his patients, maybe he's either not taking enough measures to be anonymous or shouldn't be writing those things in the first place as a professional.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#82

Post by mrkurt »

theplague42 wrote: post #77
twic wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scott Alexander wasn't worried about readers of Slate Star Codex finding out his real name, he was worried about patients who knew his real name finding Slate Star Codex. Using a pseudonym on the blog was a reasonably effective trapdoor function.

Why publish something you wouldn't want your patients to read?

I'm all for anonymous publishing, I think it's a powerful and useful.

Retconning SSC as an "anonymous" publication is silly, though, and really dilutes the efforts of people who truly want to or need to remain anonymous.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#83

Post by NicolasGorden »

mrkurt wrote: post #46
NicolasGorden wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel motive is important. Was there backlash because the NYT published an opinion some disagree with? Or was PPI going to be exposed that hurt a medical professional maintain his practice? I think one carries a very real reason for backlash. The other, not so much. Also, what was being requested? Did Scott make this personal and ask for someone to get fired? If he did, equating this with actions like that makes sen…

Personal information that Scott Alexander _already published_ was going to be republished. He's published all his own personal info repeatedly for years. Deleting a site you've posted on thousands of times is a quality tantrum.

You can consider it an over-reaction. But calling it a tantrum, using that specific word, really highlights your flared emotions. When people resort to value laden language instead of more objective, reasonable language, it says a lot about their mindset.

On the actual subject, scale and magnitude are issues that most rational beings consider. His avoiding people knowing his name on scale makes sense. Our society in general has even codified this difference in law by separating 'public figures' from 'private individuals'. It seems disingenuous to ignore this concern or equate using your name online with having it published on one of the most read publications in the world.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#84

Post by zozbot234 »

avsteele wrote: post #39

Article fails to defend the NYT in any substantive way, and the writer makes obvious their biases with statements like: S.S.C. supporters on Twitter were quick to identify some of the Times’ recent concessions to pseudonymous quotation—Virgil Texas, a co-host of the podcast “Chapo Trap House,” was mentioned, as were Banksy and a member of ISIS—as if these supposed inconsistencies were dispositive proof of the paper’s…

> Note too the lack of any real investigation or original reporting here; the author hasn't bother to talk to Metz?

The article specifically mentions that Metz did not want to be quoted directly; most likely, the author did talk to him. (Though, it's even less clear to me why Scott would want to lie about what Metz said, so I'm definitely inclined to trust Scott's account of the matter.)

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#85

Post by avivo »

As someone who works at the intersection of technology and journalism, it hurts to see how many misunderstandings there are in these comments and elsewhere. The tech world (and HN in particular) deeply needs a solid explainer on how journalism works. So many misunderstandings!

(Of course, many/most journalists also need an explainer about the tech world. And that is not to say that some of the more nuanced critiques on journalism or its implementation are not on point — as many journalists would agree! e.g. Jessica Lessin... and Taylor Lorenz https://twitter.com/Jessicalessin/status/1278332719974449152)

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#86

Post by nothal »

whatshisface wrote: post #11
commandlinefan wrote: post #3

Not that the NYT has any business printing somebody's name who doesn't want it to be printed, but I kind of feel like he had been looking for an excuse to shut down the blog for a while - it had been a long time since any of his posts really felt inspired like they were even a year ago. This gives him an excuse to make a clean break.

That theory directly contradicts his claim that he was considering continuing his blog under a different name.

You don't have to live by principles you raise espouse anonymously 24/7.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#88

Post by mrkurt »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #12

> For one thing, the S.S.C. code prioritizes semantic precision, but Metz—if Alexander’s account is to be taken at its word—had proposed not to “doxx” Alexander but to de-anonymize him. Oh? From Wikipedia: > Doxing, or doxxing (from "dox", abbreviation of documents), is the Internet-based practice of researching and publicly broadcasting private or identifying information (especially personally identifying informatio…

He's not an anonymous blogger. He's forthcoming with personal information. He's published his full name multiple times (even on his own blog). It's not doxing.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#89

Post by Izkata »

luckylion wrote: post #65
atdrummond wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems the goal lines have been moved to KiwiFarms’ brand of doxxing. As to whose ends that serves, I’ll leave as an exercise to the reader.

Have they? The real name of anyone posting anonymously or under a pseudonym has always been the gold standard of doxxing. It's usually easy to go from full real name to business and private addresses, emails and phone numbers, especially when the person has a web presence, but also for anyone with a few bucks to spare who's happy to pay a data broker.

> The real name of anyone posting anonymously or under a pseudonym has always been the gold standard of doxxing.

The word "doxx" comes from "documents" because it originally didn't refer to just a name, but an actual document listing out lots of personal information. Everything you mentioned afterwards and more.

Re: Slate Star Codex and Silicon Valley’s War Against the Media

#90

Post by [deleted] »

JoblessWonder wrote: post #63
tripletao wrote: post #28

What an ugly article. A couple quotes: > It remains possible that Alexander vaporized his blog not because he thought it would force Metz’s hand but because he feared that a Times reporter wouldn’t have to poke around for very long to turn up a creditable reason for negative coverage. The reporter is unaware that the Internet Archive exists? The content is obviously still readily available, so the reporter is either…

FWIW, the Internet Archive is willing to remove content if you can prove you are the owner and request it using the proper methods.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN