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

How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 596 posts

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#301

Post by iagooar »

chris_wot wrote: post #108

When I was on Wikipedia as an admin, someone modified their signature to point to a user who didn't exist. I was pretty pissed off about this, and so I went to the admins noticeboard I'd setup not really that long ago to ask someone to resolve the issue. This is where I did something particularly dumb. I created the account to the non-existent user and posted a few comments on it - then quickly switched back to my Ta…

I must honestly say, I don't get why you'd be pissed off about something like this, nor why would the community lynch you for creating an account.

Seems a bit like sect behavior to me (arbitrary rules and punishments).

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#302

Post by gnopgnip »

paulhauggis wrote: post #219

This is the reality of social media. If you offend the wrong person, you will most likely get fired from your job and or get unwanted attention in other parts of your life..all for just expressing an opinion. It's essentially online bullying by people that want to silence you for having an opinion that is different than their own. The ex-Mozilla CEO knows this well. An online bullying campaign was launched against hi…

Would society really be any better off if people aren't held accountable for what they say?

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#303

Post by Torgo »

danso wrote: post #17

I'd like to think that as the world gets more saturated in constant social media and sharing, that we'd have a higher tolerance for things...in this case, a joke that if a person told it to you, with the right tone of voice, it'd be funny...imagine Louis CK making that quip. But no, I doubt it...I think it's more a physical limitation of our brains...we just don't have the brain system designed to adequately consider…

>imagine Louis CK making that quip.

Here's Louis CK doing a bit about being so disgusted by a gay guy rollerblading that proclaims "go skate into an AIDS tree, you motherfucker."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q--gp6YpOpQ

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#304

Post by geofft »

Torgo wrote: post #290
geofft wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to say, I remember the account name "Ta bu shi da yu" from when I was active on Wikipedia (it's been about 10 years) and you seemed cool. I missed whatever drama this was, but my only association with that name is that it was someone who was active on Wikipedia and doing useful things. Regarding Bryan Cantrill, never forget this post (a one-line reply at the bottom): http://cryptnet.net/mirrors/texts/kiss…

Provided without comment, here's Cantrill on Twitter relatively recently criticizing Linus Torvalds' "idiocy" in a usenet post from 2000: https://twitter.com/bcantrill/status/456540342649487361

He acknowledges that in the replies, but this particular "idiocy" is not one of tone, behavior, or offense. It is about bad technical policy in the pursuit of ego, which is something that Linus has done several times since.

(And he's a brilliant enough kernel hacker that he can work around his own bad policy and still come up with a system that works well, but that doesn't mean it's not bad technical policy. I feel bad begrudging him for making a worse product when it's so good due exactly to his skill, but still, the product could have been better if he avoided making these sorts of decisions.)

Anyway, I do kind of wish Bryan would issue a clearer apology for what he said 20 years ago. But I also kind of wish we lived in a world where he didn't have to, and it's obvious he's grown up in the last 20 years.

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#305

Post by coldpie »

ll123 wrote: post #300
coldpie wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The ex-Mozilla CEO knows this well. An online bullying campaign was launched against him and he was forced to quit. Hahahahahahaha no. Eich paid money to political campaigns to ensure that some of his own employees and fellow citizens would not have basic human rights. Then, he refused to apologize for it and dodged the question when asked if he would do it again. That's not "expressing an opinion," that's nearly s…

Do you think people should get fired and ostracized for donating to Planned Parenthood? They literally murder babies. What kind of person thinks murder is ok, and would donate money to help an organization systematically murder? This kind of person does not belong in a position of power, full stop.

How do you define "baby"?

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#306

Post by fenomas »

jim_greco wrote: post #276
fenomas wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's an offensive tweet. It was offensive to you . It also wasn't offensive to some other people. Offensiveness isn't an objective property; the fact that something offended you doesn't make it "an offensive thing".

And segregation wasn't offensive to most southern whites. Your counter argument is silly because you could use it to argue that nothing is offensive.

Nothing is offensive or inoffensive, in and of itself. A person is offended by it, or they aren't.

Offensiveness is a function with two inputs; it depends on both the thing and the person in question.

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#307

Post by protomyth »

ForHackernews wrote: post #161
cheald wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first tweet, which seems to be the one that people reacted most strongly to, is pretty clearly a lampooning of Mel Gibson. I suspect most people missed that, though. It's distasteful, but it's not exactly Dickinson himself expressing racist, victim-blaming sentiments; it's a mockery of them. The second is a pretty standard libertarian talking-point (which is more "personal responsibility rah rah rah" than "yay, s…

> the fourth I suspect you're misinterpreting as "Tech managers don't want to hire women", when I think it's more "Tech managers don't care about the gender of their developers" You're giving that the most contorted, charitable reading possible. In your reading, the reference to a "unicorn" is nonsensical. I would argue the accurate reading is: "Tech managers don't spend time worrying about hiring talented women beca…

"You're giving that the most contorted, charitable reading possible."

I don't think he is, but given you only have 140 characters on twitter, everyone should give "the the most contorted, charitable reading possible" unless you follow up with the person and get a clarification of their tweet. Hell, given autocorrect, you should do that even if you think it is plain.

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#309

Post by tjradcliffe »

gearoidoc wrote: post #247
gear54rus wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This and many other problems are instantly rectified when one stops using shit like twitter or fb. Communicating with friends? fine, perfectly acceptable, PM or share with some reduced circle. Trying to be funny in the world where someone could get butthurt over a joke that was snooped from the conversation not intended for their ears? You're asking for it (for the lack of better wording). And yes I do realize the ir…

A tweet is not part of a private conversation and the user in question should have known that - particularly considering their profession. Twitter & FB aren't the problem. A lack of awareness and judgement is.

You're right that lack of awareness and judgement is the problem.

Lack of awareness of the fundamental error of attribution, and rushing to judgement based on far too little information.

Anyone who thinks they can reasonably judge anyone based on any single post, much less 140 characters, is not doing a great job of being a citizen in the 21st century. Everything we say can be misunderstood, and if you can't imagine anyone tweeting something you don't like without them being racist/sexist/whateverist that is simply because your imagination sucks as a tool for knowing reality, just like mine, just like everyone else's.

What we can or cannot imagine has absolutely nothing to do with what is real. This is the lesson of three hundred years of science. This is why ideas must be publicly tested by systematic observation, controlled experiment and Bayesian inference to be counted as knowledge.

This is not to say we must never judge, but that judgement is far more difficult than most people realize, and they are far too quick to do it based on far too little information and far too much imagination. [edit: I should have said "we are far too quick..." The habit of judgement is hard to break!]

Re: How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco’s Life

#310

Post by logfromblammo »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #245
kristofferR wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"MRA is short for Men's Rights Activist. MRAs argue that, as human beings, men should have human rights, due process in legal matters, and should not be subject to "reverse discrimination" in favor of other groups. MRAs typically point to men's lower life expectancy in almost every country, higher rates of incarceration, more severe penalties for similar offenses, lower rates of health care spending and health resear…

So how does any of that make you a loser? What's going on in this thread? As far as I can tell it's nothing more than a similar type of bullying the article is itself is talking about, which I didn't ever expect to see on HN, let alone tolerated. At what point can you no longer express controversial opinions without being called a loser?

On the Internet, someone is already calling you a loser, possibly without your knowledge. It's best to worry more about the folks who have greater power to destroy your social standing than just simple name-calling.

And to provide a sentinel value for the previous search space, I'll just say it. You, and everyone else who may be wondering if someone on the network is calling them a loser, are all losers.

Now that's taken care of, and you can go about your business, expressing controversial opinions without worrying about incurring greater harm to yourself than has already occurred.

Post reply on HN