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

The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 784 posts

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#361

Post by Clubber »

singingboyo wrote: post #336
frosted-flakes wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why people like Queen Elizabeth (specifically, not the rest of the royal family) are widely held in such high regard. She rarely makes any comments about anything that could be discerned as political, and as a result she has stayed largely neutral. Even people like my dad, who is highly conservative and vocally dislikes all celbrities, still thinks she's a saint. I'm not convinced—she keeps her mouth shut bec…

I generally agree, though I don't think the "saintliness" even matters. The queen as seen by the public is probably a persona, sure, but so long as the persona stays put, she's a symbol of stability, and that is the whole point of the monarchy. This even shows up in tech - Bill Gates isn't exactly known for widespread political opinions, and while we all know he was probably not a great person early on, he's now gene…

>he was probably not a great person early on, he's now generally contributing to universally approved causes, and otherwise just there, so to some extent he's a symbol of the possibilities available through tech.

You probably haven't been following Gates lately. His reputation has tarnished in the last couple of years.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#362

Post by conductr »

vorpalhex wrote: post #146
toastercat wrote: post #71

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

What's kind of scary to me is that newly minted adults never knew a single Sue before social media.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#363

Post by vorpalhex »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #349
vorpalhex wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's throw in a more complex example. Is someone who identifies as a "trap" trans? Is that self identification trans-phobic? Is it a valid self identity? What if someone identifies as a "trap" but not trans?

I've never heard of anyone identifying as a "trap" unironically. This sounds like a straw man. I would equate a trans woman calling themselves a trap to being the same as a black person calling themselves the N word. It's a way of taking back a slur.

This was such a hot debate on a set of subreddits it caused a collapse of a huge subreddit, the ousting of a powermod, and several spinoff subreddits. Admittedly it was a few years ago, but it was an interesting fight to watch from the sidelines.

My preference here is to refer to people however they want to be referred to. When I adopted that view, I thought it was very safe but it has actually landed me in hot water many times. I still stand by it though.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#364

Post by djKianoosh »

travisporter wrote: post #354
vorpalhex wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

Excellent theory. I think it's more than that - you now have tidbits of her opinion on every little thing without the benefit of nonverbal communication, empathy and nuance that you would if you actually talked to her for the same amount of time.

these two comments put together are so on point. it's almost as if we as a species are still learning how to communicate in this internet age

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#365

Post by dheera »

toastercat wrote: post #71

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

I don't Tweet because Twitter never promotes my post to hashtags and people who might be interested in my content. People I respond to with questions never reply. Basically, nobody reads my stuff. It's a waste of time if you're not already famous.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#366

Post by unfocussed_mike »

toastercat wrote: post #71

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

Yeah. A few years ago I revisited a Twitter account I had registered and not used. And I posted for a while.

And then I realised I hated the trajectory I was on, and I deleted every single post and the account.

I now have an account and, like the article says, I don't post.

Twitter is a bonfire of nastiness.

You either give in to it or you have to commit to spending an awful lot of time ignoring the cesspit of general awfulness, and pretending bad faith is good faith for the purposes of dialogue with sealions who learned their chops through Gamergate.

If you tire of all that (or if you are a woman and tire of the astonishing, violent sexualised nastiness that you disproportionately attract) and make use of the conversation controls so you can continue to peacefully discuss things only with people you want to, everyone else accuses you of being "aFrAiD oF dEbAtE" or censorship, everywhere else. (Including here.)

Stuff that.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#367

Post by kbelder »

mftb wrote: post #169
arbol wrote: post #7

25% of Americans sometimes tweet? That seems very high. I only know a couple of people who use Twitter...

It is. The statistic the article is actually referencing is that ~25%, "use twitter"[0]. That most likely indicates they at least open Twitter. Another post from the same site, the article references, has the headline that about 10% of those create 80% of the content[1]. Bottom-line a fraction of 25% sometimes tweet. [0] https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media... [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/i…

Yeah, I have to use twitter sometimes to check for immediate status bulletins from certain companies. I just hold my nose, check their stream, and immediately exit.

And, of course, sometimes I accidently click on a link on HN that points to Twitter without realizing it, and I have to NOPE back out as fast as possible.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#368

Post by Dylan16807 »

vorpalhex wrote: post #267
herbstein wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's generally quite hard for a trans person to be civil with a transphobe. Just as it's hard for e.g. black people to be civil with a racist. The bigot will, whether conscious or not, make the life of the minority absolutely terrible. With LGBTQ it is therefore not just a difference of opinion on taxation, or a few percentage points difference in a tariff. For trans people it's about whether the other person even ac…

Let's throw in a more complex example. Is someone who identifies as a "trap" trans? Is that self identification trans-phobic? Is it a valid self identity? What if someone identifies as a "trap" but not trans?

That's more a problem of vagueness and guessing than real complexity, because it's slang with unclear/multiple meanings. Some people use "trap" to mean transgender, some people use it to mean transvestite. Everything beyond that is based on intent.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#369

Post by stjohnswarts »

toastercat wrote: post #71

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

there are filter plugins that will kill off 90% of the garbage if you're dedicated enough to add filter words and tags. You'll never get rid of all of it though. I personally don't tweet, but I do follow people that I admire/enjoy their thoughts. Also a few news feeds just to stay abreast of stuff.
Post reply on HN