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

191–200 of 299 posts

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#191

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

worik wrote: post #188
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Blame the perpetrators.

Interesting. Perpetrators suggests a crime. Separately, it suggests that you believe there is a known cause and a source of the malady.

- If true, who, do you believe, the perpetrators are ( be as specific as you think you can be )?

- If true, what do you believe the crime of those perpetrators is ( again, be as specific as you can )?

- If true, who or what is, in your mind, ultimately responsible for the issue that has embroiled both victims and perpetrators?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#192

Post by dang »

rapnie wrote: post #5

This page dates from 2017. See also earlier submissions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24627363 (2692 upvotes, 1099 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14585882 (389 upvotes, 190 comments)

Thanks! Macroexpanded:

Like Oil Leads to Global Warming, Data Leads to Social Cooling - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38482582 - Dec 2023 (15 comments)

The reputation economy is turning us into conformists (2017) [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28744471 - Oct 2021 (204 comments)

What Is Social Cooling? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25746131 - Jan 2021 (246 comments)

Social Cooling (2017) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24627363 - Sept 2020 (1058 comments)

Social Cooling – How big data is increasing pressure to conform - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14585882 - June 2017 (185 comments)

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#193

Post by hnuser123456 »

rapnie wrote: post #5

This page dates from 2017. See also earlier submissions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24627363 (2692 upvotes, 1099 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14585882 (389 upvotes, 190 comments)

This was an interesting time. In some ways I felt like the internet was even more bifurcated then than now, between US political parties. This is when primitive chatbots, before GPT LLMs, could have mostly only been used by large nation states. This is when concerns about significant numbers of bot accounts on reddit became plausible. It felt like a time when the internet was being manipulated in a more subtle way than it is now.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#194

Post by scoopdewoop »

toomim wrote: post #186
acdha wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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%.

The data in the link is clear that the opinions are always partisan based on the very last person shot at... that does track.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#195

Post by anal_reactor »

zahlman wrote: post #174
anal_reactor wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how curse words are born. Which is funnily appropriate because English is really lacking in this department.

> English is really lacking in this department. Really? As compared to what? I would have said Japanese is the language that actually lacks in this department.

Besides English, I speak Polish, Spanish and Dutch. English curses are the lamest.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#196

Post by AnthonyMouse »

blargey wrote: post #146
Jensson wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't want to get harassed and attacked at the level Trump gets so there are strong incentives to not do what he did. Saying there are no reasons not to do it is just ignorant, most people prefer peace and quiet over drama.

Joining the crowd to express approval for extremism (or equally extreme disapproval) has a much lower bar than making the "top-level" statements you refer to, though. Inflammatory content is constantly rewarded with a firehose of such "engagement", and it's coming from the vast populace that's supposedly averse to drama.

Suppose there is an arsonist setting fire to random houses. They come by and throw a Molotov cocktail through your window.

We then observe that you immediately drop everything to deal with the fire. Should the conclusion be that you love arson and enjoy spending time on it? More importantly, do we like a system where the arsonist is rewarded for getting you to spend time on something?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#197

Post by paulryanrogers »

pornel wrote: post #58
dmje wrote: post #52

Not using the hellscape of modern social media solves the problem, no?

Unless lack of social media presence will be taken as a signal that you have something to hide, you terrorist/bot.

Or if you find yourself targeted for non-media criteria, like being Hispanic and needing to buy something from Home Depot.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#198

Post by wat10000 »

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…

I'm confused. How is that the opposite of what he actually said? Charlie Kirk was strongly Christian, as I understand it. If a faithful Christian argues against cherry-picking the Bible, doesn't that imply an endorsement of everything in it? So if the Bible says to kill gay people, which he said it does, then does that not mean that he thinks that should be done? Especially given he describes it as "God's perfect law."

I don't understand how this would be "debunked" or mean anything other than what King originally said it meant, unless we're absolutely forbidden from doing even the most basic and obvious logical deduction on statements.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#199

Post by wat10000 »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #147
scoopdewoop wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sit down. The right wing is actively zip-tying entire apartment complexes of poor people, even US citizens, while pointing guns in their faces. Thats violence, and exactly what the left has been ringing the alarm for for years.

Um. There is a notable difference between state sanctioned violence, for which, state does claim monopoly and semi-random vigilantes. I am concerned that I even have to point this out ( edit ) that the two are not quite the same.

Yeah. State-sanctioned violence is a fuckton scarier.

Do you think state-sanctioned violence can't be described as "political violence" or that it can't be used to murder political opponents? If so, may I introduce you to most of history?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#200

Post by wat10000 »

toomim wrote: post #186
acdha wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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%.

Given the right's overall reaction to things like January 6th, I conclude that this number tells us more about what the left vs right thinks qualifies as political violence, not about their support for it.
Post reply on HN