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

The internet is already over (2022)

samkriss.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 283 posts

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#251

Post by itishappy »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #234
p5a0u9l wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you’re serious and not just trolling - what even is wokism, aside from a name thrown at people you disagree with? Bigotry is a known, studied phenomenon. Are you saying there is not a natural tendency to prefer one’s own kind and mistrust foreigners? Are you saying that groupthink respects no particular ideology?

Wokism is a rejection of common sense, exchanged with an embrace of exotic rationalization flowers bred in the left-leaning echo chamber hothouses of academia and Tumblr. You can reduce anything to "a name thrown at people you disagree with", and anything can be "a known, studied phenomenon". Especially if researchers can safely study it when academia is captured by an ideology that's hostile to certain viewpoints. ;…

Weird, I can't seem to find that definition anywhere. The general council of Governor DeSantis defined it in court as the following:

> the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them

I have a feeling you're describing a personally held belief rather than a societally accepted definition, which would explain why yours seems to single out specific groups and views you (assumedly) disagree with.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#252

Post by archagon »

_heimdall wrote: post #249
archagon wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One recent example is QAnon and its popularity throughout the Republican party, all the way up to the former president. Once a crazy idea reaches critical mass and gains political power, legality becomes irrelevant. Nazism was similarly insane and conspiratorial, and we all know what happened there.

The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time. Regardless of the often overused WWII analogies, how would banning voter rights work in your example of QAnon and the Republican Party? Would you want to see anyone believing QAnon conspiracies banned from voting, even if you are c…

> The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time.

Some of the core beliefs underpinning Nazism were based on bizarre occultism and antisemitic conspiracy theories. I suppose people simply ignored or brushed off what they didn't like, much as they do with QAnon politicians today.

> Regardless of the often overused WWII analogies, how would banning voter rights work in your example of QAnon and the Republican Party?

I never said anything about banning voters. I was just lamenting how easily the crazies can coalesce and gather power these days. Don't know what the solution is. Maybe we're just doomed.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#253

Post by _heimdall »

archagon wrote: post #252
_heimdall wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time. Regardless of the often overused WWII analogies, how would banning voter rights work in your example of QAnon and the Republican Party? Would you want to see anyone believing QAnon conspiracies banned from voting, even if you are c…

> The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time. Some of the core beliefs underpinning Nazism were based on bizarre occultism and antisemitic conspiracy theories. I suppose people simply ignored or brushed off what they didn't like, much as they do with QAnon politicians today.…

Yep, just realized I got comments threads crossed here. Ignore the banning voters question, sorry about that!

My understanding of the history of how the Nazi Party took power is a bit different than what you're describing, curious what you may have seen that I haven't. My understanding is that the party was always based on racist ideology but that it only went antisemitic in the 30s around the time Hitler gained power.

Sorry again about the voting question, that's very confusing when I got the context wrong here!

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#254

Post by _heimdall »

archagon wrote: post #252
_heimdall wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time. Regardless of the often overused WWII analogies, how would banning voter rights work in your example of QAnon and the Republican Party? Would you want to see anyone believing QAnon conspiracies banned from voting, even if you are c…

> The Nazi Party wasn't particularly popular in Germany until the great depression, but I've never seen it described as having been viewed as insane or conspiratorial by Germans of the time. Some of the core beliefs underpinning Nazism were based on bizarre occultism and antisemitic conspiracy theories. I suppose people simply ignored or brushed off what they didn't like, much as they do with QAnon politicians today.…

With regards to potential solutions, I think it really comes down to fighting for a system we believe is sustainable long term and resilient to bad ideas floating around the population. To me that means doubling down on many of the core ideals of the American system, throwing out where we've gone wrong, and doubling down on free speech.

Ultimately all we can do is trust that the system is designed to withstand. If we don't think the system can work without breaking our own rules to "do the right thing" then what are we really doing? As long as people can speak their minds and hash out disagreements in public we're all better off. When ideas that may end up being dangerous are forced to stay behind closed doors we really have a problem.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#255

Post by cowboylowrez »

johnny22 wrote: post #107
asdff wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be better to instead say, what does a discord server offer to you that a mailing list does not for your technical user group? I think most people are on discord because its fashionable and they are unfamiliar with older technology like mailing lists, which were more common place when they were only children perhaps.

I'm almost never looking for a mailing list. I've been on the internet for 20 years and they never fill the same niche as IRC. Same for discord. mailing lists can't do what it does.

I've never successfully used discord, sure I have an older computer and slow internet but I just don't understand why facebook and the like are fine but discord never displays for me.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#256

Post by parl_match »

bsder wrote: post #80
krapp wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Provide reliable evidence of your own, then. What objective measures are you using, other than your own personal taste? What quantifiable data can you provide to back up your claim that great films are no longer being made? And how does your definition of greatness apparently presuppose widespread impact, but somehow presumably exclude any modern films that have demonstrably widespread impact?

Money--overall monetary takes are down across the board. It was never easy for artists to make a living, but now it's ferociously miserable. Innovation--its documented that everything is now IP sequels and the number of original things is way down. Impact--which artists and decades were playing at the last wedding you went to? Yeah, thought so. I'm reminded of the punk documentary where the original punks were horrif…

On all three, I'd like to point out that I covered these in my original post. You expect to look at box office takes, source your media from large studios, and go to weddings between boring people.

Again, the world is changing. You have not.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#258

Post by TSP00N3 »

itishappy wrote: post #251
shrimp_emoji wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wokism is a rejection of common sense, exchanged with an embrace of exotic rationalization flowers bred in the left-leaning echo chamber hothouses of academia and Tumblr. You can reduce anything to "a name thrown at people you disagree with", and anything can be "a known, studied phenomenon". Especially if researchers can safely study it when academia is captured by an ideology that's hostile to certain viewpoints. ;…

Weird, I can't seem to find that definition anywhere. The general council of Governor DeSantis defined it in court as the following: > the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them I have a feeling you're describing a personally held belief rather than a societally accepted definition, which would explain why yours seems to single out specific groups and views you (assumedl…

I think urban dictionary did a pretty good job on this one:

“Woke

When this term became popularized, initially the meaning of this term was when an individual become more aware of the social injustice. Or basically, any current affairs related like biased, discrimination, or double-standards.

However, as time passed by, people started using this term recklessly, assigning this term to themselves or someone they know to boost their confidence and reassure them that they have the moral high grounds and are fighting for the better world. And sometimes even using it as a way to protect themselves from other people's opinion, by considering the 'outsider' as non-woke. While people that are in line with their belief as woke. Meaning that those 'outsiders' have been brainwash by the society and couldn't see the truth. Thus, filtering everything that the 'outsider' gives regardless whether it is rationale or not.

And as of now, the original meaning is slowly fading and instead, is used more often to term someone as hypocritical and think they are the 'enlightened' despite the fact that they are extremely close-minded and are unable to accept other people's criticism or different perspective. Especially considering the existence of echo chamber(media) that helped them to find other like-minded individuals, thus, further solidifying their 'progressive' opinion.”

Link: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Woke

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#259

Post by account42 »

wruza wrote: post #250
account42 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more effective is not using Youtube or similar algorithmic feeds for content discovery.

Simply not using it doesn’t help, ime. So what to use instead?

> Simply not using it doesn’t help, ime.

I disagree. Consuming less mindless content such as watching videos is always helpful.

> So what to use instead?

Try recommendations from real humans such as friends or posters in online communities you are part of.

Re: The internet is already over (2022)

#260

Post by avh02 »

_heimdall wrote: post #240
archagon wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A single crazy in a sea of normalcy will be diluted. A congealed group of crazies, however, has political and social power.

I get that crazy ideas can spread, but what is the actual concern? Are you worried about people believing the ideas, or people acting on them? If the latter, are you worried about them acting in ways that aren't already illegal?

Some of them with wild ideas do things like try to storm the capitol on thought processes riddled with ridiculous ideas. I'm not an American, but watching that is scary. The same problem exists in other places and people believe absolutely wild things unquestioningly and act on them on a daily basis, sometimes harmlessly, sometimes very harmfully.
Post reply on HN