The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#161

Post by gorwell » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 4:48 PM UTC

foofoo4u wrote: post #155

enchiridion wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For grad school across fields a statement supporting “equity and inclusion” is becoming the norm. While this does not sound political, the use of the word “equity” vs “equality” is political. Specifically, equity explicitly entails redistributing resources based on lack of privilege. This is instead of equality, which entails providing everyone with the same resources and opportunity. Now we are left with question of…

I want to add from anecdotal experience that this conformist ideology spans beyond just university applicants. I have had to declare my views and positions on "equity and inclusion" at job interviews for software development positions here in the Bay Area. I'll call them out; it was DoorDash in SF.

How did they ask that question? How direct are they in determining a candidate's ideology and political leaning?

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#162

Post by detaro » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

rndgermandude wrote: post #157

blueflow wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until the escalation at 36C3, we thought the incident at 35C3 was: A random guy from the CrewCrew (new security persons) came to our assembly and got offended by VC's domain. They parted without reaching conclusions. Only after the escalation at 36C3 i learned that: - that guy at 35C3 was the CCC's president - seemingly being an exception of the "all-female" rule - the "CrewCrew" are not just some activists, but some…

>- the "CrewCrew" are not just some activists, but some sort of authorized force Legally, they would be "Ordner"[1], and are thereby "authorized". It is perfectly legal for organizers of "assemblies" to recruit and use volunteers to keep order and peace, as long as these volunteers are unarmed (by law). The Gewerbeordnung does not come into play here. I am not quite sure they were up to snuff when it comes to identif…

I don't think Versammlungsgesetz is likely to be relevant to Congress. It's a regular event with paid tickets (primarily restricted to a somewhat limited audience), access control etc, not a public event open to all. Versammlungsgesetz is more relevant for public protests and such, which everyone can just go to (which in turn have stronger legal protections).

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#163

Post by woodruffw » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

caeril wrote: post #147

woodruffw wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If he's an open and virulent racist you should have better proof than a twitter account. Sure. Here's vc calling someone who isn't nonwhite a "creature" and implying that they would discriminate against whites[1]. Here's vc hanging out with a bunch of people wearing white nationalist apparel and holding a sign that references a racist meme[2]. > It's unwise to make such extraordinary claims without evidence beyond…

> hanging out with a bunch of people wearing white nationalist apparel and holding a sign that references a racist meme Getting a rise out of the easily-offended is as old as time. Your Mom jokes go back centuries . Satirizing those who take themselves so seriously that they take offense at words and images is downright Shakespearean. Late 20th century stand-up comedy relied on inducing offense. Andrew Dice Clay was…

> Getting a rise out of the easily-offended is as old as time. Your Mom jokes go back centuries. Satirizing those who take themselves so seriously that they take offense at words and images is downright Shakespearean. Late 20th century stand-up comedy relied on inducing offense. Andrew Dice Clay was particularly good at this.

Sure! I don't believe anybody can object to these historical claims.

The problem is as old as satire itself: if the only people listening to your jokes are the ones who genuinely believe the positions you're lampooning, you're no longer the comedian. You're now either a fool or a willful pundit among fools.

Shakespeare is deeply funny because he knew his audience was overwhelmingly poor & common Londoners; people aware of England's class system receptive to irreverent treatments of nobility. "Get thee to a nunnery" is funny because the commoners are laughing at the portrayed impurity of the nobility; it's transgressive.

4chan's humor is transgressive, and I love it. But vc's claim to continuity with that tradition doesn't bear scrutiny: scrape away the thin layer of racist language, and there's no wit or insight. That's why only racists find it funny, and why vc finds himself in the company of & doing the work of fools.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#164

Post by scarmig » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:09 PM UTC

gorwell wrote: post #161

foofoo4u wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to add from anecdotal experience that this conformist ideology spans beyond just university applicants. I have had to declare my views and positions on "equity and inclusion" at job interviews for software development positions here in the Bay Area. I'll call them out; it was DoorDash in SF.

How did they ask that question? How direct are they in determining a candidate's ideology and political leaning?

At Google, a couple years back they swapped out one of the technical interviews for a G&I interview, which is really just a behavioral interview. But the questions come from an approved question bank, with each question tagged with a different attribute it's supposed to probe. One of these tags is DEI, and you're required to ask at least one question tagged DEI when conducting one of these behavioral interviews.

Usually the question does not explicitly call out race or gender, but the grading rubric definitely dings the candidate if TC doesn't reference them in their answer or says anything about political, economic, or regional diversity instead.

The one saving grace of this system is that no one expects any meaningful hiring signal to come out of these interviews unless TC is a total idiot when answering the questions.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#165

Post by mike00632 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:40 PM UTC

Mordisquitos wrote: post #132

spectramax wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a distraction and diversion from the original comment. Hollywood is not at the scale of the internet. Some privileged people got cancelled in Hollywood, who cares. When a hard working person gets cancelled by saying something stupid, the consequences are back breaking.

While I agree that ordinary people being cancelled for saying something stupid is a bad thing that should be condemned[0], I'll play devil's advocate: however unfair these events may be, are they truly statistically significant? Or is concern about "cancellation" of hard working people itself a moral panic amplified by the nature of modern media? Sure, we've all heard of donglegate, or about that guy whose hand did a…

When have you ever given the "OK" hand gesture around a politician? Why are you saying that like it's some innocuous thing that anyone would do?

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#166

Post by shkkmo » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #48

germinalphrase wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making show dead the default would be a nice step.

After setting "show dead" to "on", I am rarely more enlightened than before. It seems that HN moderators are an order of magnitude better at their jobs than average and recognize value or its absence fairly well.

Comments become dead due to user voting and can also be resurrected if people vouch for them.

I usually read the dead comments and occaisonally do vouch for them if I feel they were constructive and accurate but unpopular.

There is a seperate system of flagging comments which does usually lead to moderator review amd potential account action.

It is extremely rare for me to see a flagged and dead comment that doesn't obviously merit it.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#167

Post by lotsofpulp » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

Minor49er wrote: post #140

lotsofpulp wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the purpose of using a different word for a man senator and a woman senator?

To identify their gender. Like the differences between waiter/waitress, masseur/masseuse, actor/actress, and countless of other examples.

>To identify their gender.

The purpose of my question was to lead to the inevitable question of what the purpose of identifying a senator's gender was, at least in the context of the comment I was replying to.

>Like the differences between waiter/waitress, masseur/masseuse, actor/actress, and countless of other examples.

I would ask the same question for those, but at least those might be used simply because they are frequently used and it might be habit. But I have never seen the word "senatress" used in 30+ years of living in the US, and I read a ton of political news.

Although, I id not know about masseur and masseuse. I thought all people who gave massages were masseuses. But I am not familiar with the massage scene. I can see a possible purpose for clarifying a woman performing massages versus a man performing massages since someone might prefer a massage from one rather than another.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#168

Post by mike00632 » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:44 PM UTC

dkarp wrote: post #63

AutumnCurtain wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are best off when we acknowledge that "opinions" can and do deal deadly harm every day, and not avoiding that point when it is explicitly made.

Today's valid opinion is tomorrow's invalid opinion and vice versa

It is pretty clear which opinions that are accepted by many people today well be unacceptable tomorrow. So why not examine that further? It feels like you're denying your conscience.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#169

Post by InitialLastName » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 5:57 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #112

InitialLastName wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Publicly espousing an unpopular opinion now can be career suicide Let's not pretend this is new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist The difference now is that visibility is more uniformly distributed across the population.

> Let's not pretend this is new Let's not pretend the scale of the phenomenon today and mass surveillance capacity of today plus mass exposure and permanent public record of social media, web forums, even public spaces and events (e.g. with someone recording a video) is in any way comparable to the McCarthy era. Or the the "offenses" people get social-mob-attacked, pilloried, and fired are in any way comparable to th…

Most of the people I'm seeing get actually cancelled are... being considered "an enemy of the state working to overthrow the government".

I'm also seeing a lot of base-rate fallacy and availability bias issues (surprisingly, from many of the same people who complain about other people falling prey to the base rate fallacy w.r.t. Covid). That you can think of a few instances where people were loudly pilloried for, say, weaponizing the state use of force to racist ends, doesn't mean that it happens that often.

Re: The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video]

#170

Post by notabee » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #99

nixpulvis wrote: post #47

Let's use Gender as a quick example, why not? A few years ago, I couldn't have said I thought about it at all. For better and for worse, it wasn't part of the discourse. Now, I'm not all that different, yet it comes up again and again. I'm often forced to choose a side, even when it's all hypotheticals and virtues. I feel forced because online media is permanent, each statement is my closing argument. When the litiga…

These people always existed, it is just an uncomfortable change. It used to be holier than thou people at church now it’s holier than thou suburban teenagers on social media. It’s uncomfortable because many people did and still do think these people are liberal and “on their side” and don’t get that this toxic human behavior has existed forever and goes between groups.

I grew up around fundamentalist religious folks and I am glad that someone else sees the parallel here. And it's hard, because besides the more sociopathic types that are 100% motivated by social status, there are many who really mean well and just don't understand how destructive dogmatic thinking is, and how it tends to mainly help bolster the aforementioned sociopaths in their goals of domination rather than any intended good effects in the world.