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

The group chats that changed America

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 164 posts

Re: The group chats that changed America

#131

Post by UncleMeat »

neilv wrote: post #129
UncleMeat wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The disinvitation data is so incredibly small that there's no way on earth we can call this "rabid." In Haidt and Fukuyama's "The Coddling of the American Mind" they present data on disinvitations attempts . And it is in the tens of attempts nationwide. They even have to present the data with Milo Yiannopoulos removed since he made up a considerable portion of all disinvitation attempts. You can think that students a…

Campus talk de-invitings are only small part of the set of behavior I was referring to. (I was sloppy, and didn't integrate the anecdote well as I wrote the comment, so I think the anecdote confused my message more than helped.)

My general observation is that none of these things (witch hunting, attacking, or deplatforming from the left) happen at any scale to merit their coverage other than perhaps "public figures get yelled at on twitter."

And, I dunno, I feel like the fact that my friends who aren't public figures but do research on climate change get weekly death threats just seems more important than the fact that people yell at JK Rowling online for being transphobic.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#132

Post by neilv »

UncleMeat wrote: post #131
neilv wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Campus talk de-invitings are only small part of the set of behavior I was referring to. (I was sloppy, and didn't integrate the anecdote well as I wrote the comment, so I think the anecdote confused my message more than helped.)

My general observation is that none of these things (witch hunting, attacking, or deplatforming from the left) happen at any scale to merit their coverage other than perhaps "public figures get yelled at on twitter." And, I dunno, I feel like the fact that my friends who aren't public figures but do research on climate change get weekly death threats just seems more important than the fact that people yell at JK Rowl…

That's awful about your friends, and I agree there appears to be a huge general problem with that kind of thing. I hope the FBI are able to help, on at least a case-by case basis, if they can't solve the pipeline problem.

I still think there's a large problem with a dominant mode of interaction we're seeing by much of the left-leaning (it's pervasive online, and transparent pandering and manipulation in left-appealing news shows), and that it's hurting more than it's helping.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#133

Post by dang »

neilv wrote: post #127
dang wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We got complaints about your use of the word "rabid" and I think they have a point. That crosses into name-calling in the sense that the HN guidelines ask you not to do. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

OK, sorry for violating the decorum. At the time I wrote it, thought it was an apt term, about behavior by "my own team", but point taken, and I think I have a better sense of the rule now, thank you.

Appreciated!

(I'm a bit squeamish about the word decorum but that's me being nitpicky)

Re: The group chats that changed America

#134

Post by UncleMeat »

neilv wrote: post #132
UncleMeat wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My general observation is that none of these things (witch hunting, attacking, or deplatforming from the left) happen at any scale to merit their coverage other than perhaps "public figures get yelled at on twitter." And, I dunno, I feel like the fact that my friends who aren't public figures but do research on climate change get weekly death threats just seems more important than the fact that people yell at JK Rowl…

That's awful about your friends, and I agree there appears to be a huge general problem with that kind of thing. I hope the FBI are able to help, on at least a case-by case basis, if they can't solve the pipeline problem. I still think there's a large problem with a dominant mode of interaction we're seeing by much of the left-leaning (it's pervasive online, and transparent pandering and manipulation in left-appealin…

I agree that there are people on the left who are mean online and that they shouldn't generally act this way. I just think that

1. This largely ends here (there are exceptions, and it is definitely no fun to be yelled at online)

2. The right has consistently acted in all of the same ways (plus more bomb threats) to no similar criticism

3. The political strategy of the left cannot require "literally everybody online is on their best behavior all of the time."

And no, law enforcement is absolutely uninterested in dealing with death threats sent by people who think that doing research on climate change is evil. The idea that the FBI would help out is odd to me.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#135

Post by ajross »

slibhb wrote: post #125
ajross wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just very obvious that they are having the opposite effect. I don't kow what that has to do with an "echo chamber". Yikes. When something is "very obvious" to you, to the extent that you find yourself exasperated by everyone else's inability to see the obvious truth you're taking as a prior... You are almost certainly in an echo chamber. The stuff you sneer about here has real argument around it. It's not as d…

You jump from bizarre accusation to bizarre accusation. Here's my go at diagnosing you (and this goes for many people in this thread): the centerpeice of your worldview has been "liberals good, conservatives bad" for your entire life. Now, when faced with clear evidence of well-meaning liberals enacting harmful policies in the name of "racial justice," your brain short-circuits and you start sputtering gibberish (or…

> your brain short-circuits and you start sputtering gibberish

Exactly. I think we know which of us is in an echo chamber.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#136

Post by neilv »

UncleMeat wrote: post #134
neilv wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's awful about your friends, and I agree there appears to be a huge general problem with that kind of thing. I hope the FBI are able to help, on at least a case-by case basis, if they can't solve the pipeline problem. I still think there's a large problem with a dominant mode of interaction we're seeing by much of the left-leaning (it's pervasive online, and transparent pandering and manipulation in left-appealin…

I agree that there are people on the left who are mean online and that they shouldn't generally act this way. I just think that 1. This largely ends here (there are exceptions, and it is definitely no fun to be yelled at online) 2. The right has consistently acted in all of the same ways (plus more bomb threats) to no similar criticism 3. The political strategy of the left cannot require "literally everybody online i…

Understood, though I didn't have that idea about #2. My impression was that it was a well-known problem (going back to talk radio and Rupert Murdoch properties, and then growing and being more in our face with everything the Internet enabled).

Maybe one of the problems is that, online, a flood of dozens of angry tweets stomping on someone, by (for the sake of argument) a small minority of people who are having a bad day... has the effect that people are routinely (almost systematically) stomped, because there's always some dozens of people having a bad day? And they all sound the same, so maybe it's a rotating vocal minority that looks like a bigger problem than it is?

Regarding death threats...

I think we have different expectations about the possibility of gov't help (I'm still a bit Pollyanna on this). Local police might or might not have the resources to take the report and coordinate with federal resources, but it's likely inter-state, so the victim could go direct to the FBI.

I'm sure I've read news stories of the senders of death threats being tracked down by law enforcement.

And, I suppose the sender just might be linked to a domestic group/network (or foreign agitators) that the FBI is already tracking.

If the researchers are under a university or NGO, are they getting support from their organization, or do they need to confront the org's administration into interfacing better with law enforcement regarding death threats?

(I'm speaking of baseline situation in recent years; I have no idea what the situation at the FBI is this week, given the various gov't disruption going on, and the keyword "climate" being targeted by some. Even if the situation is complicated at the moment, maybe lead the reporting of a crime and request for assistance with the death threat part, and then the details relevant to the investigation/analysis include that the victim is a climate researcher?)

If all else fails, an org's lawyer (and investigator they hire) might also identify doxing and egging activity (especially online) that's traceable to death threats, and be able to do more with law enforcement and/or civil courts.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#137

Post by UncleMeat »

slibhb wrote: post #109
UncleMeat wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Remove algebra from the school curricula" is a lie. The decision that made noise was about eliminating accelerated algebra classes where people take algebra ahead of the normal schedule. Whether you think that is dumb or not, it is not "removing algebra from the school curricula."

They (CA) are dumbing down what we teach children (delaying Algebra I, or replacing it with "data science or statistics") because there are racial disparities in test scores. That's the result of wokeness, and it's bad.

Like I said, you can think it is bad if you want. But what happened wasn't "removing algebra from the curriculum."

Re: The group chats that changed America

#138

Post by UncleMeat »

neilv wrote: post #136
UncleMeat wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that there are people on the left who are mean online and that they shouldn't generally act this way. I just think that 1. This largely ends here (there are exceptions, and it is definitely no fun to be yelled at online) 2. The right has consistently acted in all of the same ways (plus more bomb threats) to no similar criticism 3. The political strategy of the left cannot require "literally everybody online i…

Understood, though I didn't have that idea about #2. My impression was that it was a well-known problem (going back to talk radio and Rupert Murdoch properties, and then growing and being more in our face with everything the Internet enabled). Maybe one of the problems is that, online, a flood of dozens of angry tweets stomping on someone, by (for the sake of argument) a small minority of people who are having a bad…

It is true that basically every public figure has people screaming at them on twitter or bluesky constantly. This is probably bad in general, and I think it is worth understanding how this sort of thing can affect the opinions and behaviors of public figures. I suspect that I wouldn't respond well to waking up every day to having people yell at me online.

But this effect isn't politically aligned with the left. So it becomes frustrating when this is used exclusively to criticize the left and to excuse the right.

I'm curious if you've ever interacted with law enforcement organizations for something like this. Remember, my friend gets regular death threats. Even if somehow magically the FBI acted on the first one, will they act on the 10th?

And no, public universities do not hire private investigators via their legal office to track down death threats their faculty receive.

Re: The group chats that changed America

#139

Post by iszomer »

chimeracoder wrote: post #101
dralley wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Today, virtually everyone is anti-woke. I have yet to hear a coherent description of what "woke" even fucking means that doesn't ultimately dissolve into a pot-pourri of personal grievances.

> I have yet to hear a coherent description of what "woke" even fucking means that doesn't ultimately dissolve into a pot-pourri of personal grievances. Exactly - that's the entire point of a dogwhistle.

I have yet to understand what a dog whistle is in this regard but in response to quickslowdown's reply, I can only best describe 'woke' as using victimhood as the means to justify(?) their ephemeral power(?) in whatever context they deem fit? /shrug

Re: The group chats that changed America

#140

Post by lovich »

dang wrote: post #37
e40 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think I have ever disagreed with you dang, except in this case. The comment seemed thoughtful to me.

I appreciate the reply. My reaction, like most moderation comments, was shallow and limited in scope to what I know about forum dynamics. If you come out swinging with Nazi references, you're turning the knobs to 11 from the start. That's not compatible with the kind of discussion HN is going for. It's particularly troublesome when the thread is new, because threads are so sensitive to initial conditions. Also it's n…

Based on your lack of action on right wing extremist comments, I do not believe in the sincerity of your recalcitrance.
Post reply on HN