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

The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

documentjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 292 posts

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#211

Post by dfxm12 »

oceanplexian wrote: post #198
dfxm12 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a time where tolerance and respect for minorities is slowly becoming mainstream You could have said this at least for the last 70 years. It doesn't change the systemic issues that enable prejudice against minorities. This means prejudice is still more mainstream than tolerance. Recently, there was a SCOTUS ruling that allows one to refuse making websites for same sex couples. This whole case was based on a falsifi…

And? The other side was screaming at the top of their lungs that any business should be able to discriminate against a customer for not showing vaccine records. The only conclusion I’ve come to is that everyone is a damn hypocrite. Everyone wants to discriminate against people not in their group because they’ve been brainwashed, and because people are assholes.

Thank you for at least recognizing that SCOTUS in on a side. However, it's hard to take your counterpoint seriously when 1. SCOTUS regularly upholds a private business' right to discriminate against same sex couples 2. tons of states passed laws explicitly prohibiting at a state level proof of vaccine without challenge anyway. These are not similar situations at all.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#212

Post by jononomo »

hutzlibu wrote: post #129
jononomo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My motto is "don't trust anyone under 30" -- because in my experience they just don't know enough yet to have valuable opinions and also because the kids these days have a value system that deifies mental illness and victimhood, and I'm just not interested in the opinions of people who operate from a mentally-ill victimhood stance.

But do you actually interact with kids? If you would, you might find that there are differences, just like with old people.

Yes, I've interacted with the kids. They decorate their desks with Harry Potter paraphernalia and they boast about their eating disorders.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#213

Post by maxbond »

chriswarbo wrote: post #203
Pannoniae wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Conspiracy theories isn't an epistemological designation, it's a political and rhetorical one." Well, that's the problem. If the word was only used for baseless things, it would be taken seriously. But nowadays, "conspiracy theory" is mostly used to discredit legitimate opinions or ideologies just because the powers being don't like them.

"Conspiracy theory" is nothing more/less than attributing the cause of something to manipulation by some (usually secret) group, i.e. a conspiracy. Some are correct, some are wrong. Believing the Earth is flat isn't a conspiracy theory; believing that a secret organisation is suppressing this knowledge in favour of a false globe model is a conspiracy theory. Believing that certain social structures/institutions disad…

I agree about conspiratorial thinking, I think you wrote a good exposition on that subject, and I think the way you incorporated Bayesianism is interesting.

I disagree with the part where you say "merely," a conspiracy theory plays a particular role within political discourse.

Conspiracy theories are intimately connected with power relations and ideology. They are also syncretic (or at least, the ones that fail to be perish) - they can incorporate any idea and even contradictory ideas and accommodate them, and the contradictions only serve to reinforce the theory rather than weaken it. That's very different than other kinds of "theory".

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#214

Post by Pannoniae »

maxbond wrote: post #101
Pannoniae wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Conspiracy theories isn't an epistemological designation, it's a political and rhetorical one." Well, that's the problem. If the word was only used for baseless things, it would be taken seriously. But nowadays, "conspiracy theory" is mostly used to discredit legitimate opinions or ideologies just because the powers being don't like them.

"Political and rhetorical" does not mean "without substance." These are legitimate fields of inquiry, not dirty words. (The same goes for "ideology", which often gets this treatment as well.) ETA: I think I understand better the miscommunication here, I didn't mean "for political ends," I meant more, "within the context of political science." Like you might say, "it's a physical phenomenon as opposed to a chemical on…

Fair enough, I see what you mean now. It was a bit misleading in the original post, I apologise for misinterpreting it.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#215

Post by mindslight »

add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #205
mindslight wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found some insight in your last sentence, but on examination it feels myopically specious like so much political discourse. The invocation of "left" and "right" are always put forth as some overriding distinction, but the actual dividing line for the issues in your comment is whether policies were palatable to big business, regardless of whether out of immediate financial self interest or to divide the plebs over s…

As a straight white dude I still benefit from living in a world with more social equality and less division. But sure, it's less tangible than the rich benefitting from sucking up all the money. There are tangible reasons for social progress as well, like for example in a world where women aren't pressured to be closeted I don't have to worry about marrying a lesbian who's trying to fit in. But rather than iterate th…

> rather than iterate the reasons we all benefit from living in a world with acceptance, it feels like enough to support it on principle

>> (And yes there are definitely arguments to be made that appeal to loftier goals such as freedom etc, but those are orthogonal to discussing who actually benefited from each winning trend).

Sure. This type of comment is exactly what I meant by the last bit I said. Including a summary of one team's well-reasoned support for a topic is also one-sided stirring the pot, regardless of whether one agrees with the argument specifically (which I do).

(The "right" would make an analogous argument about trickle down economics and how things would be so much worse for the grassroots right if big business was further constrained in any way)

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#216

Post by maxbond »

Pannoniae wrote: post #214
maxbond wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Political and rhetorical" does not mean "without substance." These are legitimate fields of inquiry, not dirty words. (The same goes for "ideology", which often gets this treatment as well.) ETA: I think I understand better the miscommunication here, I didn't mean "for political ends," I meant more, "within the context of political science." Like you might say, "it's a physical phenomenon as opposed to a chemical on…

Fair enough, I see what you mean now. It was a bit misleading in the original post, I apologise for misinterpreting it.

Nah that's on me. Appreciated though.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#217

Post by ROTMetro »

hammock wrote: post #102
ravenstine wrote: post #19

The real counterculture right now is non-participation . In a world where virtually everything is either designed to completely waste your time or fail and not be repairable, it's a highly radical act to stop consuming like the 95%, preferring to spend time with other humans in reality doing something that isn't technological. In spite of the popular world pushing the message that you will be fulfilled living in virt…

Networks of cottage industry. During Covid lockdowns I joined a powerlifting gym that was a startup in an old dry cleaners, had to “try out” to get in (make sure I wasn’t a narc), was the only gym in a city of 5+ million that was open and they had papered over the windows so prying eyes couldn’t observe the no-masks inside. I had the fewest tats in the place, you only wear black, there will never be any TVs and the h…

Find the guy making racks/benches/etc to sell, and you will find the local invite only power gym.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#218

Post by hutzlibu »

jononomo wrote: post #212
hutzlibu wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But do you actually interact with kids? If you would, you might find that there are differences, just like with old people.

Yes, I've interacted with the kids. They decorate their desks with Harry Potter paraphernalia and they boast about their eating disorders.

First, who did taught them about all that, that annoys you?

Secondly, maybe try seeing more people under 30 regulary with an open mind. I am sure you will eventually find someone not engaged with that. Just like you can find people over 30, who are still open to the world.

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#219

Post by dogman144 »

20 Interviews is an interesting read, and the author is smart to link Snowden to this indirectly.

I agree with the author’s assessment that a/the counterculture to the early 2000’s global tech MAGA FAANG thunderdome will come out of that… space in the way described: some mix of Snowden, crypto, compass meme, e-deologies.

If you read Snowden’s bio, he was fully schooled in the internet being a new space of free thought and open information.

If you read 20 Interviews, Nick Land comes up… a lot… in interviews with edgy teenagers.

One of the worst Intel leaks recently, the discord/Ukraine leaks, came from a what looks like a perma-online discord resident. You can guesstimate that he was in the direction of the political compass culture.

Crypto (cryptography and cryptocurrency) itself comes out of the original internet-establishment/surveillance state haters.

Jack Dorsey is firmly an old school cypherpunk.

I don’t think there’s a cohesive label for all this outside “cypherpunks” although that feels dated. but it is a cohesive group and this article was interesting to read as it seems rarely Linked in public.

I see it, there’s a group that is extending the cypherpunk ideologies of the 90’s combined with the nihilism of watching climate change/COVID failures combined with internet edge-lord roots. I think it’s a potent force. It has so far:

- brought consumer encryption into the world

- caused two of the largest intelligence leaks in recent memory

- love it or hate it, invented cryptocurrency and permanently changed conversations about what money is and how it’s accessed to include a new $5bil global market

- brought tor and vpns onto the scene

- brought you the Arab spring

Re: The internet didn’t kill counterculture, it's just not on Instagram (2021)

#220

Post by lofatdairy »

Wow, really like this piece. Not much to add, just think that it ties together a lot of concepts in really conceptually rich ways (dark forest communities, "breaking" platforms as a hallmark for success, aesthetics of identity, etc). Also really admire how theory is applied in ways that add to the piece, while still leaving it approachable and appropriate for a magazine piece. Would love to see this expanded into a more full text at some point, it definitely captures the current zeitgeist far better than most mainstream articles.
Post reply on HN