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

I don’t want to be an internet person

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 319 posts

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#161

Post by suslik »

ClassyJacket wrote: post #138
bitwize wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because no body actually cares, no body will use your made up pronouns. This is why some transgender and nonbinary people have stopped trying to reason with their friends and family about their gender identity, and have resorted to clicker-training them like dogs to use the appropriate pronouns and pay them basic human respect and dignity.

Refusing to play ridiculous pronoun games is not hurting your respect and dignity. It is not anybody else's problem or responsibility to participate in this.

There is a difference between the usage of 'xer' by an edgy teenager who identifies as something incomprehensible vs, for instance, using 'she/her' to refer to a biological male that made a conscious, adult decision to transition to female.

If one decides to change their first name, they have every right for their friends and family to respect that. If I wanted to be called, for instance, Vladimir instead of Richard, it would be really bloody rich if my mom insisted on the name _she_ thinks fits me better. Same with sex/gender transition (I am not up to date on terminology here, but you know what I mean) - there is nothing more than showing basic respect for choices an individual does for themselves.

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#163

Post by blue039 »

In the past being an "internet person" brought you into interesting sub-cultures. You had shibboleths (like quoting bash.org) that would identify you. Since the internet was small you would meet genuine often interesting people. I still have friends from the "wild west" days of the internet. The time period, I think, was the absolute best time to be alive and on the internet (though terminally online lamers and cry bullies demanding censorship may disagree).

Now, the apt term for people who are "too online" is "terminally online". The terminally online are more like a cancer than an interesting sub-culture. Since social media has allowed them to gain some semblance of following in a hyper-niche subgroup they think they can take their absurd opinions, styles, ideas, etc into the real world and expect it to work. These people are easily identified. When placed in an uncomfortable situation they become cry bullies. You might know many of them as your current HR department.

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#164

Post by [deleted] »

sugersvoltet wrote: post #88
WFHRenaissance wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>While CharlotteFang may be termed something close to reactionary (if your IQ is low and you can only think of 3 or 4 political archetypes) I would put them more in the neo-Nazi / pseudo-Esoteric Hitlerist archetype ( https://archive.ph/qlYqD ): >How to save a nation in 5 steps: >First, you kill the Jews, who always seek to ruin and exploit other nations. >Then, you remove any peoples who are not native to the countr…

[deleted]

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#165

Post by nickstinemates »

throwaway4aday wrote: post #38

I'm pretty sure this generalizes to everything. People who cultivate a persona in any sub-culture or domain seem to be a fish out of water when confronted in a different context. Take someone from the rave scene and plop them down in a microbrewery bar and everyone will gawk at the brightly colored fidgety person that has no idea what to order. Take a polished SV entrepreneur and deposit them in an Idaho roadhouse an…

I'm an internet person who would do well in all scenarios you mentioned, but those are likely exceptions to the rule.

I can imagine places I would stand out - but it's within other niche subcultures like a Biker Bar or homeless encampment.

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#167

Post by vaidhy »

buildsjets wrote: post #15

"All my friends are online. Will people forget about me if I am not on the internet?" Yes. But they really weren't your friends to begin with, so it doesn't matter.

So, who are "real" friends? Only people who you interact in face to face? Does the same thing also extend to family? If I move countries and can only meet my extended family over the web, they become "not my real" family?

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#168

Post by batman-farts »

ahoy wrote: post #116
woodruffw wrote: post #10

I thought this sounded familiar, and sure enough[1]. Edit: To make it explicit, which Palladium notably fails to do: this person is a reactionary and has a history of encouraging young girls to commit suicide. [1]: https://web3isgoinggreat.com/?id=founder-of-milady-nft-proje...

Palladium is a Thiel-backed rightwing propaganda outlet that insists it's "non partisan". It's a shame to see t shared here

I did not know, but am not surprised, that Palladium takes Thiel funding. That greatly clarifies this article’s purpose for me. It seemed odd to see another think piece about the NFT trend when it has already largely burned itself out, but Davis here is acting as something of a “party whip” for Thiel’s nascent political movement. The message of the article is much more aimed at the people being described in the article than it is at you or I: be less like these insipid Twitter personalities, be more like JD Vance and Blake Masters.

Re: I don’t want to be an internet person

#169

Post by hacym »

coldtea wrote: post #79
hacym wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re weirdly trying to attack the author. Why is that?

Because I don't like reading shallow hit jobs, and I think it's not just sloppy writing, but reflects to their authors too.

How is an opinion piece a shallow hit job? If you’re reading this as some credible news… stop?
Post reply on HN