▲ | awesome_dude 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
I think that we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I've definitely had online discussions that were orders of magnitude more productive than the best IRL conversations on similar subjects, because people felt more free to contribute. It's so much more productive online that I look for communities that discuss those subjects (eg. Twitter when it was good, or Reddit). I avoid that IRL because it's so poor. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | jchw 4 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
On an individual level, there's always going to be people whose experiences don't match the average, but I really do believe most Internet conversation isn't particularly productive. I'm not saying I don't have productive Internet conversation, though. Anyway, it seems like we're at an impasse, but I may as well link some references that back up what I'm trying to say. There was this fascinating experiment posted recently to HN, "30 minutes with a stranger": https://pudding.cool/2025/06/hello-stranger/ - conversation here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45124003 Publications regarding how people are exposed to opposing viewpoints online and how that influences polarization: "How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting" https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2207159119 "How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media?" https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244019832705 "Like-minded sources on Facebook are prevalent but not polarizing" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06297-w | |||||||||||||||||
|