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

Social Cooling (2017)

socialcooling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 299 posts

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#181

Post by toomim »

alwa wrote: post #178
toomim wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Today’s “The Western Journal,” that august organ of journalism which you cite here, also features such headlines as “Demonic Compulsion: School Ran Weekly Witchcraft Address, Shut It Down Once They Couldn't Force It on Christians Anymore.” It saddens me to think that this kind of thing is permeating into HN.

Please see the primary source I just included as reference [2]. You don't need to trust the western journal. You can read the shooter's letter, in his own handwriting.

In truth, he's more of a political nutcase than a political activist.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#182

Post by cindyllm »

zahlman wrote: post #171
presentation wrote: post #27

You don’t need some kind of “social score” to have the chilling effect, if anything I think people self censor more because of the fear of getting berated by others for their beliefs—both by those they know and don’t. Interestingly I don’t think it’s really “cooling” that happened - if anything it’s been some people becoming extremely hot, and then the majority of people, myself included, are experiencing cooling. Un…

> Unfortunately liberals lately reinforce this by being vitriolic over everything and endorsing toxic behaviors like cutting off friends and family because they disagree on politics Perhaps some American left-wingers do. But these behaviours are fundamentally the opposite of liberal and I would like to see the label taken back from them.

[dead]

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#183

Post by Razengan »

arthurofbabylon wrote: post #34

The Americans (†) who grew up with constant surveillance (social media, cameras everywhere) aim for ordinariness. The entire generation is less likely to express a non-consensus opinion than prior generations. For good reason: with everything being recorded and broadcast, personal errors are both accentuated and persist longer with no corresponding rise in upside. Bold opinions and creative ideas are simply too risky…

> For good reason: with everything being recorded and broadcast, personal errors are both accentuated and persist longer with no corresponding rise in upside. Bold opinions and creative ideas are simply too risky under such an equation.

Or, repression will build up for so long that it will explode.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#184

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

worik wrote: post #172
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may want to elaborate. Note that the emotional tone or non-plausible scenarios are not the way to advance your argument here. Still, I will counter to show some good faith. My mom would not have placed herself in a position where there is a gun in her face.

> My mom would not have placed herself in a position where there is a gun in her face. There you are blaming the victims. That is not cool

Hmm. You actually raise an interesting issue. What is, in your mind, cool?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#185

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

scoopdewoop wrote: post #164
zaphar wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of people in poverty who do not put themselves in a postion to have a government put guns in their face. It is not poverty by and large that causes a government to put guns in their face in America. Poverty may at times be used as a justification for the actual reason that a gun was put in their face but it is not in fact the reason. Neither is it in the general case a good justification either.

What are you talking about? Literally, what? Because I just linked a source: As part of the raid, some U.S. citizens were temporarily detained and children pulled from their beds, according to interviews with residents and news reports. Building hallways were still littered with debris two days later. What was these citizens crime besides living in apartments in Chicago? Flash bangs, guns, zip ties, and being detaine…

Friend. You want to cry me a river over militarization of police and following the basic rules of engagement, I am all ears. In the meantime, detained is not arrested. Based on your overall posture, I must assume that you know this. Hell, cop can detain you during a traffic stop if they so choose. How is it any different for a building full of people?

You are upset, but it is not entirely clear to me why. In a sense, those inalienable rights were preserved if the above is understood, which means you are upset over something else.

Can you focus on what that something else is? I am not egging you on. I am trying to understand your world model.

edit:

Separately, I spent some quality time with the article you cited and, I wonder if you would like to have an opportunity to reconsider your stance:

"Four U.S. citizen children were taken from their parents during the raid because the parents lacked legal status, DHS said, alleging that one of the parents was a Tren de Aragua member."

Sadly, this is the reality made by the permissive policies US has had. Does it suck? Yeah, but those kids wouldn't have been citizens if those people did not enter US illegally. Everything here stems from multiple cascading bad decisions. We are at a point, where public sympathy for this is.. low.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#186

Post by toomim »

acdha wrote: post #180
toomim wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's using ancient data from... 1948: > We included individuals whose public exposure occurred between 1948 and 2018. The last 8 years of politics have been very very abnormal. And in today's data, the "very liberal" approve of political violence at a rate of 24% vs. 3% for the "very conservative": https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52960-charlie-kir... This ^^^ is the troubling statistic, and there's a 7x…

You’re presenting the data for whether it’s okay to be happy about a political figure’s death, not whether it’s okay to cause one. There’s a section about this you should read starting with “YouGov's polling doesn't suggest that young people or liberals are more pro-violence in general”, and in particular the stark divide about self-defense. None of this is great, but it’s hardly surprising that a minority of younger…

Nice points!

But as for "causing" violence, they also asked whether "political violence is ever justified", and the difference between left vs. right there was even more — 25% vs 3%.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#187

Post by ikiris »

toomim wrote: post #170
evilduck wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're gonna get downvoted for being a bad liar and an obvious troll who degrades the conversation and the overall site, not because of bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melissa_Hortman Getting yourself downvoted doesn't validate your lies either. Farming downvotes isn't being clever, it's being toxic.

[flagged]

Can we stop the fantasy land conspiracy posts like this first?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#188

Post by worik »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #184
worik wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My mom would not have placed herself in a position where there is a gun in her face. There you are blaming the victims. That is not cool

Hmm. You actually raise an interesting issue. What is, in your mind, cool?

Blame the perpetrators.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#189

Post by martin-t »

toomim wrote: post #169
tuyosvawnt wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A podcast bro cites scripture saying queers need to get stoned, he gets a stone to the neck himself. "Let He Who Is Without Sin Cast the First". Badda bing badda boom. Lotta angry people.

You're making a debunked claim that takes his statement out of context to make it sound like the opposite of what he actually said. https://x.com/StephenKing/status/1966474125616013664 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-dMa3rIcjY https://youtu.be/1pteZE5FpNc?si=UG2jJZovGldIJKJ0&t=1559 This has the effect of whipping up political anger and violence against people based on false pretenses. You are an embodiment of the p…

And this is why I say I don't have an opinion on his killing.

It's really easy to lie online (both mechanically by just taking stuff out of context as you showed and because people face no punishment for it).

That being said, if I had an opinion, only one of the possible sides is OK to say publicly and I think that's wrong.

For example, one of the claims I heard is that he was orchestrating/supporting harassment of college professors through his Turning Point organization. Now, harassment can lead to suicide, driving innocent people to suicide is murder, a just punishment for murder is death, and when a punishment is just then it doesn't matter who carries it out as long as they have a sufficient standard of proof.

So depending on whether that claim is true, how "successful" he was and the morality of several logical inferences (which is subjective but for each statement/inference you will find a lot of people supporting it), a sane and rational person could perfectly justify the killing.

---

Most people are hypocrites. And what they really hate is when somebody tries to apply a consistent moral system to themselves and others. Not just because it puts them to shame (most people never try to be consistent and they know it even if they'd never admit it out loud or even to themselves). But also because when you apply consistent rules to severe offenses, you very quickly get very severe punishments and people are not comfortable with the idea that they too could be punished in this manner.

---

As another example, I hate when people try to vilify him by quoting him saying some dead children are OK because that's the price for the right to bear arms. Yes, innocent people (including children) dying is sad and wrong. But what do they think happens when nobody has guns? First, people would still kill each other using other tools, even mass murder wouldn't magically stop because car ramming attacks seem to be on the rise. But, second, a long term effect is that people in positions of power who are unaccountable through legal means are no longer accountable through extra-legal means.

One of the first things every dictatorship does is restricting access to guns and confiscating them.

Yes, high gun ownership has a continual price but low/zero ownership has a much higher one-time price and after that it no longer matters what people think.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#190

Post by tptacek »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #185
scoopdewoop wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? Literally, what? Because I just linked a source: As part of the raid, some U.S. citizens were temporarily detained and children pulled from their beds, according to interviews with residents and news reports. Building hallways were still littered with debris two days later. What was these citizens crime besides living in apartments in Chicago? Flash bangs, guns, zip ties, and being detaine…

Friend. You want to cry me a river over militarization of police and following the basic rules of engagement, I am all ears. In the meantime, detained is not arrested. Based on your overall posture, I must assume that you know this. Hell, cop can detain you during a traffic stop if they so choose. How is it any different for a building full of people? You are upset, but it is not entirely clear to me why. In a sense,…

These were not simple detentions; this was ICE taking every door in a 5 story apartment complex at 3:00AM, and detaining every single resident for over 4 hours. Nothing at all like the types of detention Justice Kavanaugh refers to when he talks about the minor inconvenience of a police stop-and-investigate detention. It is not the case that your local police can do this in response to a traffic infraction.
Post reply on HN