Live data from Hacker News

I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

mrbruh.com

481–490 of 513 posts

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't ask what GPT or 3 random people said. why can't you articulate your own position?

Well you didn't answer my question. But I'm going to assume you're hinting at the false equivalency conservative line to trot out about prejudice against poor it rural people. Prejudice is rooted in lack of knowledge and unfamiliarity. Racism is familiar and has it's own body of knowledge; all wrong, but vehemently defended. Racists try to build their own narrative.

I didnt ask what the difference was, I asked why one word isn't used anymore. Why are you not paying attention?

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#482
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment above lacks essential nuance and is overly confident.

The comment above lacks contributory value and is also (ironically) overly confident.

Shall we continue into an infinite regress of zingers?

You are correct that I didn't provide supporting reasons myself. Fair point. I suppose I didn't think your comment warranted it. Saying that might come across as harsh, which isn't my goal. I'd rather shift into a constructive and specific discussion instead. In that spirit, I'll elaborate on my criticism. Let's start with your leading sentence:

> Nope, shame is ineffective as a tool for change.

There are lots of ways to improve this sentence; here is one suggestion: consider a phrasing like "In comparison to _X_, shame tends to be less effective for _particular purpose_."

I'd suggest avoiding empirical claims about likelihoods you aren't able to defend. Take this sentence fragment:

> More often people shut down or ignore you if you attempt to shame them...

If done forcefully, this _might_ lead to "shutting down" or "ignoring"; however, on what basis can one say this happens "more often"? More often than what? The writing here overreaches -- this is why I called it "overconfident".

There are many situations where one person points out a shameful behavior in another, who recognizes it, feels bad, and i.e. apologizes and modifies their behavior. My point: it would be faulty to dismiss the idea of shame as useless in social contexts.

Finally, the next sentence also struck me as an overreach:

> As a tool for oppression however, yes it's quite effective.

Care to elaborate your thinking on that one? What do you mean by oppression?

By oppression I think of a power dynamic where the weak are kept in a lower position by the more powerful. Is this what you mean? Why do you think shaming is particularly effective way to oppress? In my mind, military, physical, legal, and economic mechanisms tend to be more effective, historically speaking.

I could speculate. Perhaps you are referring to the practice by certain religious systems to make people feel ashamed for merely doing things that all humans do (make mistakes) and thus deserve punishment (e.g. by the religious elites, or worse, by yourself, thus making yourself feel weak and unworthy).

In short, I'm sufficiently enough in these ideas to be rather unsatisfied with writing that doesn't unpack the ideas at all. No offense intended. I look forward to learning what you mean.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#483
post #93

I was looking at jobs for my son at Safeway supermarkets and lazily put https://www.safeway.com/jobs in the browser. That redirects to https://www.careersatsafeway.com/desktop/home -- which is very much not about jobs at safeway -- appears to be an Indonesian gambling/gaming site. Safeway.com has zero email contacts published and expects communication to be via phone call or chatbot. I found their domain admin email…

Hi Albertsons/Safeway VP of Security Engineering here. Thank you for disclosing this. I’ll have it fixed along with the fact our VDP submission link is missing from the Safeway site. Here it is for future reference https://albertsons.responsibledisclosure.com/hc/en-us

As it's still not fixed, I tried the form there. It let me fill it out and send it in and then told me I needed to create an account, which made it appear that my submission wasn't sent.

I've done enough here but ffs, if that form requires an account to be created beforehand then don't let the submitter go to the trouble of filling it out and then discard it.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read them? If your goal is to effect change, hurting people's self esteem is a negative effect that is entirely unnecessary to change. And criminals aren't some ungovernable animals...

> If your goal is to effect change, hurting people's self esteem is a negative effect that is entirely unnecessary to change. Yes, your self esteem will likely be harmed if you do something bad and it gets found out. > And criminals aren't some ungovernable animals... ?

Keep thinking beyond the immediate for another step and you will see how harming self esteem means a person won’t productively alter their behavior. It’s in the literature I’ve cited if you’re actually curious.

And you made a value judgement about the people who end up in jail/prison, which was completely uncalled for.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#485
post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your goal is to effect change, hurting people's self esteem is a negative effect that is entirely unnecessary to change. Yes, your self esteem will likely be harmed if you do something bad and it gets found out. > And criminals aren't some ungovernable animals... ?

I'm confused too. People live inside such safe spaces now. The thought of a negative emotion is to be avoided at all costs. Shame makes people feel bad, so we must do all we can do avoid making anyone feel that. What's next? Is "disappointment" next? Having someone disappointed in you feels bad, therefore no one can ever show disappointment to others?

You’re confused about how shame could make someone unproductive? How shame could drive a behavior underground rather than eliminate it, thus exacerbating the issue rather than reducing it?

As you are demonstrating, shame is more about causing pain than changing behavior. You seem to want to hurt people, and that’s one reason why shame is not effective. You don’t care that equally or more effective means exist for improving behavior.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#486
post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep: > In sum, shame and guilt refer to related but distinct negative “self-conscious” emotions. Although both are unpleasant, shame is the more painful self-focused emotion linked to hiding or escaping. Guilt, in contrast, focuses on the behavior and is linked to making amends. [0] [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3328863/

Why is a painful emotion a bad thing?

People react poorly to it, and in situations where it is unnecessary, it’s just cruel.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#487
post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment above lacks contributory value and is also (ironically) overly confident.

Shall we continue into an infinite regress of zingers? You are correct that I didn't provide supporting reasons myself. Fair point. I suppose I didn't think your comment warranted it. Saying that might come across as harsh, which isn't my goal. I'd rather shift into a constructive and specific discussion instead. In that spirit, I'll elaborate on my criticism. Let's start with your leading sentence: > Nope, shame is…

Eh, you either seem unaware that your comments aren’t the only ones in this discussion, or narcissistic enough to believe only you deserve a full response, because every answer you’re looking for and more are in sibling comments around you, yet you choose to engage only in my shortest comment that had context you could pretend didn’t exist.

If you were trying to show some of the worst faith engagement possible on HN, you did it.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your goal is to effect change, hurting people's self esteem is a negative effect that is entirely unnecessary to change. Yes, your self esteem will likely be harmed if you do something bad and it gets found out. > And criminals aren't some ungovernable animals... ?

Keep thinking beyond the immediate for another step and you will see how harming self esteem means a person won’t productively alter their behavior. It’s in the literature I’ve cited if you’re actually curious. And you made a value judgement about the people who end up in jail/prison, which was completely uncalled for.

You know that things can be bad sometimes and not bad some other times? Shaming people to make them feel bad is not good; however feeling shame for having done something wrong is good -- it motivates one to avoid doing that again.

> And you made a value judgement about the people who end up in jail/prison, which was completely uncalled for.

You are being silly.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#489
post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shame is absolutely a valuable tool for change. Without it society would not function since many of our 'rules' are self-enforced.

I don't know why you're being downvoted, shame is one of the most powerful motivators that exists in humans; I'd put money on it being the most powerful. People who are loudly disagreeing don't understand that "shaming (v.)" doesn't always equate to shame actually being felt in the target of said shaming. The act of shaming loses a lot of effectiveness when you can find a community of people who will tell you that it…

Setting aside how wrong everything you just wrote is, companies aren’t people and do not have shame.

Re: I pwned half of America's fast food chains simultaneously

#490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, shame is ineffective as a tool for change. More often people shut down or ignore you if you attempt to shame them than actually make the change you want. Besides, it's frequently just about vengeance anyway. Shame is really hate of other, for the most part. As a tool for oppression however, yes it's quite effective.

> people shut down or ignore you if you attempt to shame them Sure, but large businesses entities (as opposed to individuals) often cannot afford such luxury. Try being a bank in a western country and ignoring a public security blog post, outlining exactly how one can exploit your online banking auth flow to gain unauthorized access to customer accounts.

That’s not shame, that’s risk. Corporations don’t have the capacity for shame, it’s the major thing people gate about corporations in the first place…
Post reply on HN