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

I wish people were more public

borretti.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–127 of 127 posts

Re: I wish people were more public

#121

Post by wredcoll »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #21
lbotos wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read GP again. > There are some out there who would love fans of Ruby on Rails to suffer because of its association with DHH. This isn’t about DHH spouting whatever he is spouting. It’s about people trying to convince others to not associate with Rails because of DHH.

It's worse than that. It's people generating a moral panic so they can retroactively declare something to be crimethink and then use that as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with them by trawling through their history. In which case it's not a matter of standing by it because mobs aren't interested in context or nuance. Society's defense against this should be that we don't use mobs to punish people for saying t…

This idea that people are too... what, fragile, to be criticized continues to puzzle me.

Dhh said some stupid stuff and now people are calling him out. Why should dhh be allowed to say whatever wants but no one is allowed to criticize him?

Re: I wish people were more public

#122

Post by AnthonyMouse »

wredcoll wrote: post #121
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse than that. It's people generating a moral panic so they can retroactively declare something to be crimethink and then use that as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with them by trawling through their history. In which case it's not a matter of standing by it because mobs aren't interested in context or nuance. Society's defense against this should be that we don't use mobs to punish people for saying t…

This idea that people are too... what, fragile, to be criticized continues to puzzle me. Dhh said some stupid stuff and now people are calling him out. Why should dhh be allowed to say whatever wants but no one is allowed to criticize him?

The problem is not people criticizing ideas. The problem is people attacking other people for saying things they don't like, trying to get them fired, etc.

Attack their arguments, not their family, employer, etc.

Re: I wish people were more public

#123

Post by wredcoll »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #122
wredcoll wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This idea that people are too... what, fragile, to be criticized continues to puzzle me. Dhh said some stupid stuff and now people are calling him out. Why should dhh be allowed to say whatever wants but no one is allowed to criticize him?

The problem is not people criticizing ideas. The problem is people attacking other people for saying things they don't like, trying to get them fired, etc. Attack their arguments, not their family, employer, etc.

I mean, you keep repeating the idea that "some people" shouldn't be allowed to use their speech but DHH can use his speech.

You can't have it both ways, either DHH is free to speak his mind on any subject he chooses, and so is everyone else, or nobody is actually free to speak.

Re: I wish people were more public

#124

Post by yanoleaf »

zarzavat wrote: post #37

It's all very well being more public, until a government decides to make 5 years of social media history an entry condition[0], and moreover imprisons those people who are denied entry instead of simply sending them home on the next flight[1]. I have no problem with this per se, as I have no plans to go to the US this decade, but I do worry about contagion. Perhaps being a public person on the internet is an idea who…

they don't care ... it's all boomer-tier scare tactics

Re: I wish people were more public

#125

Post by yanoleaf »

the anonymous are more honest because they don't worry about ostracization or whatever bullshit if people don't like their opinion ... i treat people with their "real name and real face" with suspicion because they're putting on a display that makes them "look good"

Re: I wish people were more public

#126

Post by phendrenad2 »

esseph wrote: post #49
phendrenad2 wrote: post #38

Most of the people disagreeing seem to be forgetting that public doesn't necessarily mean using your real name. We used to have vibrant communities full of people with names like "claxxon" and "zerg". claxxon knows about cisco networking and zerg knows about the best punk bands in the chicago area. Their real names? Not needed, wanted, or relevant, and we're offended you even asked, noob!

That use to be useful in a time where it was much harder to instantly de-mask those handles. If you're trying to make a name for yourself and you're social long enough, you'll eventually have a decent sized footprint on the internet. Sites and services get breached all the time.

> it was much harder to instantly de-mask those handles

This is just a failure of the baseline thought that people put into security these days. It's not exactly hard to sign up for a free email service with no tie to your real identity. (Unless you're in the EU, that is)

Re: I wish people were more public

#127

Post by phkahler »

lII1lIlI11ll wrote: post #84
phkahler wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I think the internet would be a lot nicer place if people were held accountable for the things they say and do. I agree. I've often advocated for zero anonymity by default. Everyone traceable by anyone. The thinking is that bad behavior (threats and such) could be reported. There was enough pushback to make me rethink that. People will still make threats when you know who they are - less often but they will. Offli…

> I agree. I've often advocated for zero anonymity by default. Everyone traceable by anyone. The thinking is that bad behavior (threats and such) could be reported. There was enough pushback to make me rethink that. People will still make threats when you know who they are - less often but they will. Offline (real world) harassment is still possible too without being identified, though thats getting harder every day.…

>> Nowadays people can just SWAT you...

Right. My old argument would have been that the authorities should not respond anonymous calls - remove the anonymous factor there and punish false reports. The problem is there will always be more ways to be anonymous when one has malicious intent. Thats why I've dropped the idea.

Post reply on HN