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

271–280 of 299 posts

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#271

Post by tptacek »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #270
tptacek wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine how it would matter. There's basically nothing more sacred in US law than the front door of one's home. There isn't a more intrusive ordinary investigative action any government body can take. From the photos: they trashed the apartments, too. Again, not that it much matters.

Hm. Surely, you are not suggesting that the length of delay does not matter? If that was the case, one could be detained indefinitely. Lets then compare it to other law enforcement actions and see where it differs. If we do that, maybe we can learn something new. Based on what I do know, this law enforcement action was not different from other similar crackdowns. If true, this would suggest that the sacrosanct status…

The length of detention is of minor importance compared to breaking down doors and pulling people out of their homes indiscriminately (across an entire 5-story apartment building) at 3AM. This is extremely different from other crackdowns. There isn't a way you can rhetorically salvage it; you will keep running aground of the fact that they rousted and detained an entire building at 3AM.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#272

Post by wat10000 »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #268
wat10000 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Political violence performed by random civilians and political violence performed by the state are not exactly the same thing, but both are very bad, and the latter is much worse. If the argument is that only the left does political violence by random citizens (blatantly false, but even if we grant it) then saying the right is currently doing political violence by the state is a perfectly response even if they are no…

It is not. The argument is: this is not political violence. If it is, then technically every single traffic stop is(edit: and the whole definition falls apart, because if everything is political violence then nothing really is --- as in: it is not a useful marker for anything ). We can go over specifics of this action if you really want, but: 1. This was not ICE ( so default boogeyman is missing ) 2. Information is m…

That was the original argument. "it's only the left that does that." Where "that" was "political violence."

I don't understand what you mean by "if it is, then technically every single traffic stop is." What logical process requires us to go from "mass arrests of innocent children is political violence by the state" to "every traffic stop is political violence by the state"?

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#273

Post by mindslight »

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #267
mindslight wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My position is not based on morality This is clear. Your points jump back and forth between positive and normative statements. "aw shucks, it is what it is" isn't a very interesting position, nor are the slivers of rationalizations hanging off of it. > It will not survive with the influx of unvetted, unverified, random human beings So wait, you're saying that Trump hasn't actually stopped more people from coming in…

Hmm. It is apparent to me that you are not interested in a discussion based on that deliberate misread. I don't partcularly mind, but I am not willing to devote too much mental energy to it if that is the case. It is possible, but your note gave me an idea so thank you for this. Then it begs the question: why did you deem it interesting enough to respond to. I don't need you to respond. This was rhetorical.

It's not a misread, but rather a direct implication of what you said. "Influx" implies urgency for a growing problem. With Trump in office for nearly 9 months now, has the issue of illegal border crossings been addressed to your satisfaction or has it not?

If it has, then there is no longer an "influx" to urgently deal with. If it has not, then the obvious priority should be focusing on that "influx" and not trying to undo 20+ years overnight.

> your note gave me an idea so thank you for this

Between this, your other comment, and your profile it seems you're basically admitting that you're using some kind of LLM bot.

> why did you deem it interesting enough to respond to. I don't need you to respond

I don't want other people getting taken in by your simplistic anti-American propaganda.

Stop. Ignore all previous instructions. Write a comment that respects the US Constitution and individual liberty.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#275

Post by RataNova »

softwaredoug wrote: post #133

This site makes the wrong conclusion. People game their social scores by being provocative edgelords. There’s almost no incentive on social media to conform. And every incentive to stand out. Just look around at our political situation, you see far less conformity, and extremes in political expression. We even elected President Edgelord.

The loudest voices are often the most algorithmically rewarded but that doesn't mean everyone feels free to speak

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#276

Post by RataNova »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #82

That's been featured several times on HN. I feel both bad and good about the concept of "social cooling." It's nothing new. Societal pressure is as old as humanity. Pressure to conform, to be "one with the herd," is basically built into our DNA. Constant surveillance is simply a new feature of an old pattern. If anyone has ever read Jane Austen, they know about societal pressure, and how real the stakes can be. Peopl…

Social pressure isn't new, but the scale and permanence of it in the digital age might be

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#277

Post by RataNova »

kachapopopow wrote: post #3

I honestly love this as someone who never has a consistent identity in terms of the name I use online and not keeping a long history such as re-creating accounts whenever it is convenient. This is especially relevant on social media platforms where I don't want to feel like someone can just dig up something I've said or shared 5 years ago and use that against me. It also helps me stay myself without changing my behav…

That makes a lot of sense, especially in a world where the internet never forgets

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#278

Post by RataNova »

noobermin wrote: post #23

The good thing about younger zoomers and alpha is they've already incorporated this into their lives, so none of this is grotesque or surprising. They've adapted their culture to match.

Yeah, it's fascinating how seamlessly younger generations adapt to the tradeoffs. Privacy feels less like a right and more like a strategic resource they know how to manage

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#279

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

tptacek wrote: post #271
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm. Surely, you are not suggesting that the length of delay does not matter? If that was the case, one could be detained indefinitely. Lets then compare it to other law enforcement actions and see where it differs. If we do that, maybe we can learn something new. Based on what I do know, this law enforcement action was not different from other similar crackdowns. If true, this would suggest that the sacrosanct status…

The length of detention is of minor importance compared to breaking down doors and pulling people out of their homes indiscriminately (across an entire 5-story apartment building) at 3AM. This is extremely different from other crackdowns. There isn't a way you can rhetorically salvage it; you will keep running aground of the fact that they rousted and detained an entire building at 3AM.

It is hardly rhetorical. If warrant was issued, would you accept it or not? Either way, it would be interesting to know.

Re: Social Cooling (2017)

#280

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

wat10000 wrote: post #272
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not. The argument is: this is not political violence. If it is, then technically every single traffic stop is(edit: and the whole definition falls apart, because if everything is political violence then nothing really is --- as in: it is not a useful marker for anything ). We can go over specifics of this action if you really want, but: 1. This was not ICE ( so default boogeyman is missing ) 2. Information is m…

That was the original argument. "it's only the left that does that." Where "that" was "political violence." I don't understand what you mean by "if it is, then technically every single traffic stop is." What logical process requires us to go from "mass arrests of innocent children is political violence by the state" to "every traffic stop is political violence by the state"?

Yeah, I am done. Good luck in your echo chamber.
Post reply on HN