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

Welcome to Hell, Elon

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 315 posts

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#181

Post by maxsilver »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #130
maxsilver wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government is not banning any books The local township library and school board are both literally the government, and the book banning is largely happening based on local election results (typically county positions and/or school board positions -- both from election ballots) It's not wrong at all to say the government is banning books -- that statement is objectively correct , it's just happening at the lowes…

I understand that they are public institutions, but there is a crucial distinction. When you say "the government wants to ban arms/restrict free speech" I assume you mean the state or federal government wants to introduce a new law. Whereas in this case it was the parents who were concerned and asked relevant institutions. It doesn't matter if the books promote violence against minorities or LGBT+ themes, if parents…

I disagree, there's no meaningful distinction whatsoever.

> I assume you mean the state or federal government wants to introduce a new law.

Why? If it were any other issue, no one would care about the distinction. If Allegan County, Michigan banned firearms, people would still claim it's an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights, even though it's just "concerned parents asking relevant institutions at the local level" and not necessarily a state/federal law. But when that same exact county bans books and/or libraries instead, suddenly it "doesn't count" for some reason?

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#182

Post by joshstrange »

noxer wrote: post #163
joshstrange wrote: post #34

Can't wait to see that hot takes from the free speech absolutists who have never experienced that first-hand on a platform they frequent regularly. We already know what that looks like, it's 4chan/8kun/etc and surprise, it's absolute shit.

>it's absolute shit. So is twitter. At least in the last years it turned to absolute s*it. In mid 2021 I resurrected my old long not used account. I made maybe 20 comments in 3 month before I got "banned". I'm probably not really banned I would just have to remove my last comment but I cant do that because I can not login anymore (which may or may not be related to the "banning"). The post in question was an obvious…

I have no specific love for Twitter but a platform is "absolute shit" if you can't make all the jokes you want to make? I mean is HN absolute shit because they ban excessive language, personal attacks, or reddit-style humor? I'd argue it's successful because it has these rules in place.

I also have seen incredibly too much "It's just a joke bro" "defenses" for saying certain things that I have little sympathy for it. Learn the bounds of the platform/community you want to participate in and either stay within those bounds or find somewhere else to participate.

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#183

Post by ilyt »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #130
maxsilver wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government is not banning any books The local township library and school board are both literally the government, and the book banning is largely happening based on local election results (typically county positions and/or school board positions -- both from election ballots) It's not wrong at all to say the government is banning books -- that statement is objectively correct , it's just happening at the lowes…

I understand that they are public institutions, but there is a crucial distinction. When you say "the government wants to ban arms/restrict free speech" I assume you mean the state or federal government wants to introduce a new law. Whereas in this case it was the parents who were concerned and asked relevant institutions. It doesn't matter if the books promote violence against minorities or LGBT+ themes, if parents…

"Parents told government to ban books" is still government banning the books

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#184

Post by spacemadness »

Koshkin wrote: post #117
jayd16 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny references alone will get down voted. It's just the culture of this board. If you want to joke you'll need some more substance as well.

Then it won't be a joke anymore...

Welcome to HN. We’re super serious intellectuals here and a joy at parties.

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#185

Post by memish »

happytoexplain wrote: post #128
memish wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

"Literally true" is a good standard for individual libel, but a rarely applicable standard for content moderation. The classic example is, if I post crime statistics, part of which shows that black people commit more crime, then: If I am using it to imply that we should hate black people or treat them differently, it would be reasonable to moderate away; and if I am not, e.g. my post is intended only in some legitima…

Point taken. It's messy.

You could even say that simply replying "the Earth is round" is harassment if it's repeatedly targeted at an individual or flat earthers as a group. But this is what the block or mute button is for. Everyone has the right to curate what they hear or see. They don't have the right to curate what I or you hear or see.

Silencing "the Earth is round" at the platform level for everyone is where it becomes objectionable.

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#186

Post by ilyt »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #144
Covzire wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, I think Elon's idea is moving censorship into everyone's own responsibility, something like: Follow who you want to, ignore who you don't, it's not your responsibility nor your right to silence other people off a monopoly platform just because you disagree with them.

So Twitter will stop recommending things? No more trending topics? Because right now it actively tries to spread engagement through topical controversy.

Nope, just option to opt out.

"Don't recommend me stuff from category politics"

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#187

Post by reducesuffering »

Invictus0 wrote: post #113
nelsonic wrote: post #11

Never bet against Elon. Starlink alone will make more money than twitter ever could. If you don’t see the potential for Twitter. That’s fine. But don’t write an article about how it’s “hell” if you don’t have the vision for how to improve it. That’s like someone who has no idea how to cook leaving a bad review for food they could never hope to improve on. If Elon listened to Haters/Doubters like this Verge journo, th…

Fanboying Elon on the twitter deal of all things is just hilarious. He paid $44B with no diligence for a company with hardly a billion worth of revenue , stagnating growth, a last-generation social graph, an incredibly toxic userbase, and a very demoralized staff--and he has no plan for how to fix it either. This will go down as one of the worst deals in history and here you are saying "but Starlink".

> hardly a billion worth of revenue

Where do you pull these numbers out of? Twitter's yearly revenue was $5.2 billion.

If you're so off base for the objective metric, want to guess how off you are on the rest of your opinion?

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#189

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

nelsonic wrote: post #69
everdrive wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s like someone who has no idea how to cook leaving a bad review for food they could never hope to improve on Ignoring the context of the article, I don’t believe that the example you’ve given here is really fair. It’s perfectly valid to review something which you could not create. If we excluded that whole category, then reviews would mostly cease to exist, and only peer review would be possible.

Totally agree! Peer review is the only valid feedback in many situations. You don’t see many ultra-successful serial entrepreneurs doubting on Elon! You see many of them driving Teslas. As someone who has been in the kitchen since childhood, I can appreciate how difficult great food is to create! If I taste something inferior I’m going to be specific with my feedback for improvement, highlighting the good points not…

I can't make a cell phone, so if my new cell phone constantly drops calls I'm not allowed to say it's a bad cell phone?

Re: Welcome to Hell, Elon

#190

Post by happytoexplain »

commandlinefan wrote: post #56
pipeline_peak wrote: post #9

Quoted post unavailable.

Yeah, had the same thought. People seem to be perfectly happy to participate in horribly moderated internet spaces full of people who are exactly like not-all-men fedora bullies, but in the other direction - mostly because there's no alternative (yet).

>there's no alternative

There are and have been many alternatives, but the balance between moderation and userbase is delicate. Assuming a minimum of "only moderate illegal content": Too much moderation and you might get a large userbase, but you get boring content or loud complaints from those moderated, and it discourages real conversation. Too little moderation and you get fun but chaotic/edgy content that drives away an even bigger chunk of people, and also discourages real conversation.

It seems to me that people who want Twitter to moderate less are either looking for the best of both worlds, which might be impossible, or really just want Twitter to be like 4chan, not because they really think it's "what's best", but because they want to attack their enemies in the social/political war, and that would be a big symbolic win.

Post reply on HN