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

The Disinformation

uncrunched.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: The Disinformation

#41

Post by vertr07 »

Tohhou wrote: post #36
vertr07 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to need more than wild speculation and a link to a subreddit.

Are you a newbie to the Internet? Been living under a rock? What do you want me to do cite each example with what Social Justice Warriors say they want?

I'm not new to the internet, but you are definitely new to HN. Well-reasoned and supported arguments are valued here, not baseless and fragmented conspiracy theories.

E.g. Aliens are controlling politics! Proof: http://reddit.com/r/ufos

Re: The Disinformation

#42

Post by jeswin »

kika wrote: post #31
tptacek wrote: post #7

I can't imagine how this situation could resolve itself in a way that will make The Information look good. If you weren't aware, it's a publication that asks for more than $30/mo, in exchange (literally, this is the point) for not running clickbait and keeping the signal/noise positive. I was happy to pay a buck a day for that service, but to pay for it and then see them run misleading clickbait makes me feel dumb fo…

Well, probably the following could at least help them with reputation: 1. Public apology and explanation how they are going to prevent this in the future 2. Publishing the full transcript of the story free of charge and publicly announcing it 3. Firing the reporter or editor or whoever was responsible for the act of conversion of information into propaganda. If it was Jessica herself then probably there's nothing to…

Jessica is guilty. She could have diffused the situation by saying 'We misquoted PG, sorry'.

Instead she tries to justify it and says 'Paul Graham was not misquoted'. Or at least that is what the ValleyWag troll tweeted https://twitter.com/Valleywag/status/417093209886846976

Re: The Disinformation

#43

Post by Tohhou »

vertr07 wrote: post #41
Tohhou wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a newbie to the Internet? Been living under a rock? What do you want me to do cite each example with what Social Justice Warriors say they want?

I'm not new to the internet, but you are definitely new to HN. Well-reasoned and supported arguments are valued here, not baseless and fragmented conspiracy theories. E.g. Aliens are controlling politics! Proof: http://reddit.com/r/ufos

Individuals have agendas and are attacking people due to their ideology. Look at the thread you are in. PG was attacked by people over something he never said. They didn't do it for no reason, they did it because they saw a chance to draw blood for their twisted cause. Where's the wild conspiracy again? It's not a conspiracy. It's a group of very public, transparent, active, and vocal people who are creating divisive rifts in the tech world. They are post modernists who believe in patriarchy theory and think the only way that they can destroy all of the social constructs is by forcefully enforcing public punishment for thought-crimes. Or something. It gets kind of silly.

Consider the two previous needlessly dramatic tragedies caused by the SJWs:

Donglegate - humor is problematic, and worth getting a guy fired over.

Nodegate - empathy doesn't extend to having empathy over cultural differences of people who do not understand why people would care about pronouns, which drove off one of the top contributors.

There will for sure be more to come!

>Well-reasoned and supported arguments are valued here, not baseless and fragmented conspiracy theories.

My argument is that SJWs are a terrible blight on tech as well as everywhere else. They hurt everyone and help no one. If you disagree with something I stated then tell me and I'll show you examples of people who hold that belief, and actively champion it in the tech world. Unless that's not what you are after. In which case what you do think my thesis is?

>E.g. Aliens are controlling politics! Proof: http://reddit.com/r/ufos

Yeah, dude, totally all of the people linked to and discussed in http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction are fake! I didn't link to it to show that there are examples of people who believe the things I listed on. Come on who would believe people were so crazy.

Re: The Disinformation

#44

Post by minimax »

A ton of upvotes for a Michael Arrington lecture about what is and is not legitimate journalism shows just how fickle the HN crowd is. You guys are silly.

Re: The Disinformation

#45

Post by HNaTTY »

vertr07 wrote: post #32
Tohhou wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who attacked PG have an agenda: * Publicly shame as many top males for anything possible to make room for women - assume the worst and don't try to resolve possible misunderstanding privately, but instead immediately engage in public smear campaigns. The little shitlord nerds don't deserve anything. * Smashing the patriarchy requires getting men out of positions of power, because they didn't earn any of it…

Take your conspiracy theories back to the red pill chief.

Because it's one or the other. Very nuanced.

Re: The Disinformation

#46

Post by kika »

chris_wot wrote: post #38
kika wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, probably the following could at least help them with reputation: 1. Public apology and explanation how they are going to prevent this in the future 2. Publishing the full transcript of the story free of charge and publicly announcing it 3. Firing the reporter or editor or whoever was responsible for the act of conversion of information into propaganda. If it was Jessica herself then probably there's nothing to…

They have published the transcript here: http://jessicalessin.com/2013/12/31/on-the-information-and-h...

Not they, she did. As a private person. Which is not exactly what I've meant, but definitely better than nothing.

Re: The Disinformation

#47

Post by hacker789 »

vertr07 wrote: post #35
Tohhou wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, totes there are no people like this, and the attack on PG was not agenda fueled. http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction

You're going to need more than wild speculation and a link to a subreddit.

That subreddit is full of examples of people who indeed express the views listed above (and those views are often expressed in much more hateful and bullying terms than would be appropriate here).

You called Tohhou's post a conspiracy theory, clearly implying that he's wrong; he gave pages upon pages of evidence that he's right. What more do you want?

Re: The Disinformation

#48

Post by ericd »

tptacek wrote: post #6
jmduke wrote: post #2

It’s extremely frustrating to have your words rearranged, edited and taken out of context to make it seem like you’re saying something you aren’t. This is absolutely absurd, coming from Arrington, who twisted Jamie Zawinski's words from an anti-crazy-work-hours rant into rallying cry for gullible programmers to "work hard, cry less, and make history": http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-se...

Is what he said wrong? Is his history relevant to the actual message he is communicating here? To me, it seems like the answers are "no" and "no". Guy records a radio PSA saying "don't punch strangers in the nose". Later, it turns out that the guy has a history of punching strangers in the nose. Is the PSA wrong? There's a way to write the comment that points out that Arrington's history here might be checkered. Unfo…

I guess this would be a DH1 on the disagreement hierarchy?

Re: The Disinformation

#50

Post by judk »

Malician wrote: post #40
otterley wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would you name some other ways to get rich with a reliability approaching that of starting a VC-funded startup? Yes, just invest in a mutual fund. Overall VC returns are in line with the broader market at best, and are often worse. (Source: http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2013/02/venture-capital-returns.html )

That refers to the returns of the venture capitalists, not the startup founders.

jwz, and Arrington's target audience, were startup employees, not founders.
Post reply on HN