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

Ego Death

krisnova.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 122 posts

Re: Ego Death

#21

Post by throw__away7391 »

netsharc wrote: post #9

> We aren’t using social media to drive action. We are using it to farm a false sense of worth. To cast stones at anyone who foolishly stumbles into the latest virtue-trap. Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!". I notice on Instagram you can "like" comments but not dislike them,…

It’s such a mess, getting worse and worse. I have a solution though:

> select * from posts where author_id in $following order by posted_date desc

No more gaming engagement or viral rage.

Re: Ego Death

#22

Post by CameronNemo »

rwhyan wrote: post #14

Funny how many "I"'s and "my"'s in this piece. This was especially ironic: > " I want to kill my ego , or at least substantially break it"

I read it from an egoist perspective and I think it actually makes sense. Not sure in which way you are using the word irony, but if by the technical literary definition, yes I agree. Ironic.

Re: Ego Death

#23

Post by amethyst »

throw__away7391 wrote: post #21
netsharc wrote: post #9

> We aren’t using social media to drive action. We are using it to farm a false sense of worth. To cast stones at anyone who foolishly stumbles into the latest virtue-trap. Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!". I notice on Instagram you can "like" comments but not dislike them,…

It’s such a mess, getting worse and worse. I have a solution though: > select * from posts where author_id in $following order by posted_date desc No more gaming engagement or viral rage.

That will only incentivize posting low quality worthless things in order to improve position and reach in comments. Might as well just charge them $8/mo for the privilege of making other people see their comments.

Edit: I think I misunderstood what you were suggesting (just a chronological timeline?).

Re: Ego Death

#24

Post by lnxg33k1 »

netsharc wrote: post #9

> We aren’t using social media to drive action. We are using it to farm a false sense of worth. To cast stones at anyone who foolishly stumbles into the latest virtue-trap. Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!". I notice on Instagram you can "like" comments but not dislike them,…

Are you sure that the disagree button is because they prefer positivity? I am not a social media user, I have none of them, but I've always read that social media eat their lunches thanks to flame wars, would it be possible that the non-existent disagree button is because a disagree button would be a passive way to show disagreement, while a message is more likely to generate engagement?

Re: Ego Death

#27

Post by lo_zamoyski »

netsharc wrote: post #9

> We aren’t using social media to drive action. We are using it to farm a false sense of worth. To cast stones at anyone who foolishly stumbles into the latest virtue-trap. Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!". I notice on Instagram you can "like" comments but not dislike them,…

Social media simply amplifies what is already common among human beings. One way it seems to do this is by flattening and legitimizing impropriety. Normal societies are "chunky", that is, you have niches and enclaves and varying distance unified in some increasingly "thin" manner. This enables various kinds of relationships to flourish (think of how marriage creates a special space for the couple, and then another space for the family that results from it, then consider the different space that the extended family creates, or coworkers create). But in social media, this structure evaporates. Everyone is shoved into the same space. People you barely know or don't know are on par with your closest family and friends. This is bound to cause aggression and nosiness and impropriety. To put it hyperbolically, it's like having your coworkers in bed with you making lewd comments as you have sex with your spouse. Social media encourages and defaults to this kind of boundary violation so that you are effectively consenting to it by using it because otherwise, it makes little sense to use. So telling someone to mind their own business becomes more difficult _because you're the one who volunteered the information in the first place_, whereas you can still tell an intrusive stranger to piss off with the confidence of moral justification.

Re: Ego Death

#28

Post by lo_zamoyski »

nikolay wrote: post #20
rwhyan wrote: post #14

Funny how many "I"'s and "my"'s in this piece. This was especially ironic: > " I want to kill my ego , or at least substantially break it"

I agree. To quit social media for selfish reasons is really not killing your ego; it's nourish it. Social Media should benefit all and it always comes at somebody's expense.

Not sure what you mean here. There is no obligation to use social media. Quitting it is a healthy move. It seems like you think acting for your own good is the same as selfishness, which would be ridiculous. You have a moral obligation to act for your own good. It's just that people often have stupid ideas about what it _objectively_ means to do that. True selfishness is not good for the selfish person.

Re: Ego Death

#29

Post by unsubstantiated »

>I deeply believe everyone is virtuous, as they personally define it. For the most part, I believe the world’s virtues are common. We all want peace, joy, safety, and comfort. We all want to smile.

Well I don't. And this belief isn't any more valid or invalid than mine, or anyone else's. Regardless of the flimsy definition of virtuousness, there are people out there who are hellbent on causing harm, and some are petty killers who are caught easily for tormenting and murdering their own little children, while others are in positions of serious power and leverage over nations who start wars and worse. Are there good people? Yes. Is everyone after peace, joy, safety and comfort? No Master Wayne, some people just want to watch the world burn.

The people in charge of Social Media aren't good people.

Re: Ego Death

#30

Post by ajross »

netsharc wrote: post #9

> We aren’t using social media to drive action. We are using it to farm a false sense of worth. To cast stones at anyone who foolishly stumbles into the latest virtue-trap. Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!". I notice on Instagram you can "like" comments but not dislike them,…

> Yeah, it feels like most of social media is now shit-flinging and calling the "outside group" stupid so one can feel "At least I'm not a stupid horrible person like that idiot!".

Like the folks here on HN in this very thread flinging shit and calling those horrible social media users idiots, you mean? The irony in your comment is just too much. Yikes.

Just stop. People are people. In-group/out-group abuse and hate has been a fact of life for as long as we've been a species. You treat that, as Nova did, with understanding and empathy, not with more hate.

As long as you (and you're hardly alone in this topic!) walk around with that chip on your shoulder you are guaranteeing never to escape your personal in-group prison, nor to ever make peace with the out-groups you're yelling about.

Post reply on HN