Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018)

#81

Post by war1025 » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:02 PM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #75

war1025 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm guessing that might be a challenge for you so I won't bother trying. Let me know otherwise. I was with you up until this ass-hattery. Experience has taught me that any moderate / conservative opinion is going to get downvoted through the floor no matter how well you back it up. It's easier to just burn karma with short comments. > I would go to the effort of gathering evidence of members of the GOP trashing him…

> I was with you up until this ass-hattery. Your dialog to that point came across as that of a Trump loyalist. I've learned that there's no point in engaging there, but it looks like you want to talk further, so here we go. > Trump's main sin, besides being a member of the wrong party, is that he is the most transparent President in history. He has no qualms airing his dirty laundry and it drives people nuts. Wow. I'…

> Tell me about all of his dirty laundry that he has willingly aired, please.

You just listed nine points.

> I'm still waiting to hear one good thing about Trump

He is pro American manufacturing. Honestly that by itself is enough for a lot of people.

Also this point you made gives many people great joy:

> he says wild shit that keeps the news cycle in turmoil

Regarding "transparency", everyone agrees he basically uses Twitter as a stream of consciousness diary. It bothers people that he puts as a part of the public record things that "should be kept quiet".

Re: Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018)

#82

Post by pstuart » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 8:49 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #80

pstuart wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see, this is why discussing politics here gets a bad rap. You are operating in a partisan manner and effectively trolling now. If you were actually interested in dialog, I would go to the effort of gathering evidence of members of the GOP trashing him before he attained power, as well as multiple prominent republicans who today are aghast at what he's done and is continuing to do. I'm against political parties (W…

Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are. Maybe you don't owe your political opponents better, or don't feel you do; but you definitely owe this community better if you're posting to it. This kind of thing leads to its destruction, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

@dang, I'm sorry that wasn't my intent and I was doing my damndest to stick to facts. I don't see these people as opponents and I'm not trying to "win", only to try to find some sort of mutual understanding.

This is a third rail I'll never touch here again, but I'd like to point out a couple of things for closure.

* What has been happening in the last 3+ years is not normal, and much of the population is terrified by what is happening and what is likely to happen. I am one of those people

* Politics operates in two realms: policy and theater. I've normally no interest in the latter but it has taken center stage.

* United we stand, and divided we fall. I believe that there are active efforts to promote division and my hope is for unity. And division that occurred here was counter to my goals (but I should have known better).

* Many of my fellow citizens also believe that the GOP has become a cult, centered around the topic of discussion. Most people think that cults are not a good thing.

I could go on and on, but I won't because it will fall on deaf ears.

Thank you for helping to keep this forum as wonderful as it is, and once more, I'm sorry to have cause any problems.

edit: the "deaf years" was about those that I was trying to have a discussion.

Re: Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018)

#83

Post by dang » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 11:57 PM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #82

dang wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are. Maybe you don't owe your political opponents better, or don't feel you do; but you definitely owe this community better if you're posting to it. This kind of thing leads to its destruction, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

@dang, I'm sorry that wasn't my intent and I was doing my damndest to stick to facts. I don't see these people as opponents and I'm not trying to "win", only to try to find some sort of mutual understanding. This is a third rail I'll never touch here again, but I'd like to point out a couple of things for closure. * What has been happening in the last 3+ years is not normal , and much of the population is terrified b…

I believe you! Also, I don't think it's necessarily best to treat these things as a third rail, since the only way we're going to learn as a community to stay within the functional range on hard topics is by practice.

I feel like I should explain something about moderation. There's a sense in which a lot of this is fairly mechanical. When I post a reply like I did upthread, I'm reacting to statements like "you are [...] effectively trolling now", "If you were actually interested in dialog", and so on. Such things can be removed without changing your views or compromising your argument. It's also in your interest to do so, since you're trying to stick to facts and your intention is to find mutual understanding.

The reason why we have to moderate on that fairly mechanical level is that these things have mechanical effects on discussion threads. When they're present in a discussion, it's impossible for people to see past that layer and give genuine attention to what the other party is saying, let alone find mutual understanding. This aspect of moderation is rather superficial because these dynamics are superficial. They're critically important, though, because if we can't take care of that layer, we'll remain stuck there—or actually degenerate into worse.

(That's not the only aspect of moderation, fortunately, but it's a common one.)

Re: Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018)

#84

Post by pstuart » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:46 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #83

pstuart wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@dang, I'm sorry that wasn't my intent and I was doing my damndest to stick to facts. I don't see these people as opponents and I'm not trying to "win", only to try to find some sort of mutual understanding. This is a third rail I'll never touch here again, but I'd like to point out a couple of things for closure. * What has been happening in the last 3+ years is not normal , and much of the population is terrified b…

I believe you! Also, I don't think it's necessarily best to treat these things as a third rail, since the only way we're going to learn as a community to stay within the functional range on hard topics is by practice. I feel like I should explain something about moderation. There's a sense in which a lot of this is fairly mechanical. When I post a reply like I did upthread, I'm reacting to statements like "you are [.…

The trolling comment was a mistake. I think it was true but it didn't add to the conversation. Following that logic I should have just dropped the conversation right there.

I wish there was a way to have these more challenging conversations here but I don't think it's possible. I think that there's an inherent combativeness that overrides everything else and I've yet to understand how to disarm it.

Again, thank you and I'll do my damndest not not to pee in the pool.

Re: Bland God: Notes on Mark Zuckerberg (2018)

#85

Post by therein » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 6:04 PM UTC

hashberry wrote: post #33

> Easier to conceive of Mark Zuckerberg as a machine. The memes of Zuckerberg as Data from Star Trek always amuse me.[0] Sure, it's teasing, but Data is a likable character! Data doesn't strive to be superior but to be more human, even if this means being analytical instead of emotional. Mark Zuckerberg would be far more interesting if he were "evil"--if he tried to create new values, if he tried to replace God. But…

> But he isn't even an atheist anymore and is embracing religion and Judaism[1].

This pivot literally happened as the rumors that he was thinking of running for office were coming out. He then decided to pull a "traveling across America to meet with the people" and promptly got destroyed by people realizing he is doing this to run for this office.

Zuck should be nowhere near any political power.