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

Statement on New York Times Article

astralcodexten.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 437 posts

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#221

Post by belorn »

ALittleLight wrote: post #130
eatplayrove wrote: post #125

I have never read the blog, or have any positive or negative association with it, but after all the attention this story has garnered, I just read both the NYT article and Mr. Siskind's response. The main takeaway from the NYT article is that there is a group of people in whose writings/blog comment sections/etc racists/sexists have found a home, and his is one of them. He does not address this assertion, or what the…

A while back I mentioned to my mother that I had been to a "reddit meet up" and my mother, predictably, had never heard of reddit. Later, reddit made the news, I forget exactly what for, but in was the category of harboring child pornographers, racists, or nude celebrity photos. What I did remember is hoping my mother didn't see this news article and conclude that I was out meeting with racist pedophiles. The thing i…

Specifically about the feminist point:

The quote is explicitly only about "people who talk about “Nice Guys” – and the people who enable them, praise them, and link to them". (https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_p...)

This leads to several keys questions: Are all feminist such people who talk about "nice guys" and who enable, praise and link to them?

The second question is, are all people who talk about "nice guys" and who enable, praise and link to them feminist?

The third question is if this definition of "nice guy" is the informal term or the sarcastic meaning, and how useful either are to describe a psychology profile or human male stereotype?

The fourth question is if a discussion around "nice guy" stereotype of either profile is of strategist benefit to goals of some feminist theory, and then which ones?

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#222

Post by roenxi »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #87
roenxi wrote: post #8

It is a testament to the times that someone can be subject to a NYT hit job and be able to defend themselves so easily.

How was it a hit piece? Certainly it is great he can respond.

  [Charles Murray] in particular has some very sophisticated theories about class and culture. But he shares my skepticism that the 55 year old Kentucky trucker can be taught to code, and I don’t think he’s too sanguine about the trucker’s kids either. His solution is a basic income guarantee, and I guess that’s mine too.
.. in SSC becomes ...

  In one post, he aligned himself with Charles Murray, who proposed a link between race and I.Q. in “The Bell Curve.” In another, he pointed out that Mr. Murray believes Black people “are genetically less intelligent than white people.”
..in the NYT article. That was spicing it up a little much. Looks like a hit piece.

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#223

Post by higerordermap »

dandare wrote: post #199

What I find noteworthy about this story is how contentious and weaponized have gender and race become. Out of the four negative claims, one accused Scott of racism and two accused him of of some variant of misogyny. The fourth associated him with some other form of non-pure thinking. I am afraid things will get worse before they get better. I expect the trumpism/fascism wave will provoke unhealthy reaction and furthe…

As an Indian, I'd say this kind of "SJW" rhetoric serves no purpose other than causing a reactionary change -- of more normal people favoring extreme right wing instead, and leaving a bad impression about the total social justice thing.

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#224

Post by bencoder »

sunpar wrote: post #144
konjin wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's that time where the legacy media threatened to doxx someone if they made memes they didn't like again: >CNN is not publishing "HanA*holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said h…

I don’t understand why people believe that anonymity is a right guaranteed to all people making content on the internet.

Pseudonymity is essentially the default state of the internet. The "right" to it just exists by the nature of it.

If you want to remove that right you need to argue why it shouldn't exist

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#225

Post by inglor_cz »

Udik wrote: post #142
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #95

Seriously, WTF is going on with NYT. I think something has seriously gone off the deep end with their newsroom, but I feel like it must be so culturally ingrained in their newsroom now that even questioning some basic assumptions will get one vilified as a racist or sexist. One of the most recent examples that really struck me was NYT's article about why they decided to capitalize Black, but not White, in their paper…

> One of the most recent examples that really struck me was NYT's article about why they decided to capitalize Black, but not White, in their paper Interesting also that the overwhelming majority of the readers who commented on the article itself seem to find it pure nonsense. It's somewhat telling when a newspaper stubbornly keeps serving its readers one specific opinion which they keep refusing to subscribe to. You…

Normalizing it for future generations. Once you grow up in a world where you only ever see Black capitalized but white not, it will feel natural to you, just like capitalizing the President is. (Not done in some languages like mine.)

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#226

Post by CPLX »

Aqua wrote: post #213
dandare wrote: post #199

What I find noteworthy about this story is how contentious and weaponized have gender and race become. Out of the four negative claims, one accused Scott of racism and two accused him of of some variant of misogyny. The fourth associated him with some other form of non-pure thinking. I am afraid things will get worse before they get better. I expect the trumpism/fascism wave will provoke unhealthy reaction and furthe…

The whole story background story is extremely alarming. NYT unilaterally decided to reveal someone's real identity against that person's wishes. It should honestly be made illegal but given the current political climate it's doubtful such course of action will ever be considered. This whole situation gives even more credence to the idea that decentralisation is the only way forward for mankind if we intend to preserv…

Can you articulate a coherent framework for how and why an American news publication should be prohibited from revealing legally obtained true information about the leader of a large, popular, or otherwise noteworthy community?

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#227

Post by inglor_cz »

b112 wrote: post #159
runsWphotons wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has increasingly happened with topics I know about over the past five years at accelerating rate. [If you want to be uncomfortable, consider noticing this repeatedly is part of what has driven half of the US mad.]

An interjection here. Not directly related to the NYT article, just your comment. I feel the entire US has "gone mad". I'm a Canuck, and US and Canadian politics don't 'mesh'. So whenever I've spoken to Americans over the decades, often their politics make little sense, don't align, seem cogent to me. This, of course, I consider normal for a non-local such as myself. However over the last decade or so, I've noticed t…

Interestingly, politics in Poland, a rapidly de-religionizing country, seem to follow the same trend, even though it is a very homogeneous country otherwise.

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#228

Post by inglor_cz »

dohnuts1919 wrote: post #162

> I don’t want to accuse the New York Times of lying about me, exactly, but if they were truthful, it was in the same way as that famous movie review which describes the Wizard of Oz as: “Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first person she meets and then teams up with three strangers to kill again.” I laughed out loud at this paragraph, and it's such a perfect example of why I love Scott's wri…

I wonder whether the intended endpoint of this tactics is widespread deplatforming - e.g. support for vaporizing anyone who can be guilted-by-association in the same way that Scott Alexander is in this article. If Scott's reputation is groomed to be cancelable, anyone's is.

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#229

Post by inglor_cz »

andrewfong wrote: post #40
john_moscow wrote: post #34

I am wondering, what are the legal perspectives of suing NYT for libel at this point. If Scott started a crowdsourcing campaign to fund legal defense, I would gladly throw in a couple of grand. Given the support Scott received when the situation with NYT's plans got public in the first place, this could set a very interesting precedent.

Given that his explicitly stated goal is to move on from this, probably a bad idea. Right or wrong, a lawsuit would invite the Streisand effect. As for whether there's any legal basis to sue, it's doubtful. There isn't a whole lot that's factually inaccurate in the NYT piece. It's innuendo and words taken out of context. California has a "False Light" claim that might apply, but I doubt any court would take that up.…

"lawsuit would invite the Streisand effect."

That could be fairly good effect for a Substack writer who now strives to be independent.

Unless, of course, the end result is that Visa and MasterCard deplatform Substack.

Re: Statement on New York Times Article

#230

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

vinay427 wrote: post #166
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #95

Seriously, WTF is going on with NYT. I think something has seriously gone off the deep end with their newsroom, but I feel like it must be so culturally ingrained in their newsroom now that even questioning some basic assumptions will get one vilified as a racist or sexist. One of the most recent examples that really struck me was NYT's article about why they decided to capitalize Black, but not White, in their paper…

> "white doesn’t represent a shared culture and history in the way Black does" To be fair, it's not a very high bar. I don't mean this as a slight, but "white American" doesn't seem to represent any shared culture or history. It's based on an American (originally European) concept of visibly distinguishable race rather than any attempt at an ethnocultural grouping based on something like a linguistic or culinary basi…

A stereotype is a negative amplification of facets of a group's culture. You can find stereotypes of white Americans everywhere, from /r/whitepeopletwitter to the movie Undercover Brother(great movie btw). The existence of stereotypes shows that a common culture exists.
Post reply on HN