[flagged]

bluecheese452 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah I don’t care about haxxor789 on hackernews either. Could be an llm, a foreign agent or a teenage troll. The more divisive the event the less I trust the online comments.

	▲	phendrenad2 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yes but in the aggregate, you can make inferences about public sentiment. I guess I've just resolved to be more tuned-in to what's going on in the world. I do admit, it's not for everyone...

▲

ImPostingOnHN 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I saw the comments everywhere from right-wingers, saying all left-wingers should be rounded up and imprisoned or killed. Are those the comments you're talking about?

It's really not great of all those right-wingers to advocate for violence against those they disagree with.

Of course, both you and I probably saw carefully curated outrage feeds, rather than actual data. I'm sure the actual data shows those openly advocating for violence are the minority across the board.

▲

phendrenad2 4 days ago | parent [-]

Are you seriously "both sidesing" this? Or wait, you're "neither siding" this, saying that it's all an artifact of the algorithm. Well, okay. I don't know what to say to that!

	▲	ImPostingOnHN 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Well yeah, I assume that every consumer of social media knows that the major ones actively curate posts that make you angry, because they've calculated that you will stay on the site longer if you're outraged than if you're happy, and more time on the site makes them more money selling you as the product. That's to say nothing of the discovery years ago that malicious actors, foreign nation states in particular, engage in influence operations on the sites with bots. Some do this to swing opinion to their side, others have bots inflammatorily posting on both sides of an issue just to foment unrest among the populace. My comment above was to illustrate this: that what you see on the site isn't what everybody is posting on the site. Likewise for me. We both look at the same algorithmically-run site and are served with 2 totally different experiences, and I guess now you can see why. In short, no matter what social media company you patronize, it likely does not have your best interests in mind, and definitely is not a statistically representative sample of people.

▲

bigyabai 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You've dodged the question twice now - which prominent left-wing politicians are applauding this?

I've seen all kinds of reactions, but the only one I've seen from political officials is condemnation. On both sides of the aisle, regardless of what the x.com peanut gallery insists on.

▲

phendrenad2 4 days ago | parent [-]

I'm not dodging the question, I refuse to accept that your question is relevant to the discussion just because you think it'll make your point for you (the wrong point, but hey, you'll take any win you can get when you don't have a logical way to attack an argument I suppose)

▲

bigyabai 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

"I'm not dodging the question" usually is followed up by an answer. Do you have examples?

▲

phendrenad2 4 days ago | parent [-]

You make unreasonable demands and (I assume) use the lack of acquiescence as victory? I might have to try that sometime.

▲

bigyabai 4 days ago | parent [-]

You made claims and never backed them up. You'll have to excuse me for wanting to know more.

	▲	phendrenad2 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I guess you need to re-read the things I said, again, and then maybe again on top of that. Because I never claimed what you think I claimed!

▲

4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]