Remix.run Logo
▲ hypfer 5 hours ago

HN is one of those places, actually.

There are quite a few covert psychopaths on here that happily twist knives and hurt people.

It's just hidden under layers and layers of indirection, jargon and plausible deniability. Not unlike your standard boardroom I guess.

▲MomsAVoxell 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Techno-feudalism is an Ayn-Rand objectivists wet dream, after all. There's profit in oppression.

▲bilbo0s an hour ago | parent [-]

I have a black friend who I once referred to an HN post for more information on a topic we were discussing. Hs informed me that he doesn't go to HN, "That place is a Klan rally", were his words IIRC. At any rate, I said that a lot of it is 4chan, but there's some quality there, afterall, I use HN.

He looked at me and smiled. Went back to his coding.

I just want to put it out there that just because you happen to be in a place with a lot of unsavory people doesn't mean you, yourself are unsavory. We shouldn't paint everyone with so Catholic a brush. You have to go to the grocery store, but so do pedophiles, drug lords, and wife abusers. That's kind of how I see HN.

Yes. It's a crap hole.

But some neighborhoods just have crap hole grocery stores. Tech is kind of one of those "neighborhoods", and HN is a grocery store. You don't have to socialize with the other customers, and you can restrict yourself to only buying the decent foods on offer.

▲my-next-account 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think it's typically quite obvious, or maybe I haven't seen the psycopaths. However, SWEs can be real dick heads. Just made me think of this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_5uVdy5YmA

Uploaded 16 years ago... I can't believe that a video I thought was so hilarious back then is dating me so hard.

▲kirth_gersen 4 hours ago | parent [-]

came expecting a rick roll, got an unexpected banger. thanks!

▲bongofizzbuzz 2 hours ago | parent [-]

US “Project Meridian” — A Symptom of American Decline, Not a Solution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wpjWVRSoQM

Gold pot of a channel.

▲hsuduebc2 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you be more specific? This is heavy moderated environment and I would say it's one of the most pleasurable places on public internet to be.

▲ballmerpoint 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s not heavily moderated. This is the usual link dang/tomhow give when they explain why their moderation is necessarily inconsistent:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

This is not a criticism of their moderation style, this is simply reporting how they describe it.

▲sejje 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It's largely self-moderating

▲SecretDreams 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> it's one of the most pleasurable places on public internet to be

I think we have different definitions of pleasure.

This is a relatively dry place for any kind of conversation other than hyper logic conversation devoid of empathy or humour.

On certain tech topics, it can be very informative. On anything where there is a conflict between the topic and how the base makes money, there's a lot of down voting and sad rhetoric. As a result, you rarely get to discuss the harms of AI or certain oligarchs, e.g. musk, zuck, bezos, Russia, Israel.

This is a place mostly for reinforcing your own beliefs, rather than finding new ones, unless it's around a very mild topic.

▲hsuduebc2 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I understand. As you said, it's a rather dry, mostly technical place, and that's exactly what I like about it. I appreciate that it's largely free from the suffering, injustices, and ridiculous political debates that dominate so much of the world around us.

I despise these people as much as any other decent human being should, but unfortunately, they're everywhere. Just not so much here.

▲whoanoway an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲hypfer 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not really, because a generic observation cannot be expressed specifically. So that's a weird question to begin with.

It is true that this is heavily moderated and that this is one of the more pleasant spaces, but it is also precisely the moderation style that is being weaponized.

As I said, the toxicity gets hidden in layers and layers of jargon, misdirection and plausible deniability. It gets a veneer of civilty applied, which, somewhat surprisingly, makes it hit even harder, because fighting back is a lot harder, as there is nothing immediately visible to fight back against. It just stings.

It's not just attacking but simultaneously gaslighting. Which has been what the whole internet has been doing since everything became twitter fwiw.

What I said is also not to be understood as "HN bad", because if I would feel that way, I would not be commenting here.

▲semireg 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There must be some logical fallacy here where, reduced down to human existence, all toxicity is hidden under layers. This is both an ultimately true statement of any suspiciously viewed human interaction and it kind of makes the argument moot.

Reminds me of the recent thread about LLMs controversial take on humanity: we are all terribly cynical, hallucinate importance, and we are all bad/good deep down inside.

▲ 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
▲mjburgess 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I guess they are saying people argue/comment in bad faith. That they don't really mean what they say, and at least, they say it not to discuss it but for some hidden agenda.

The problem is that outside of "where's my keys? what are we having for lunch?", most language is a symptom of people's agendas. Its a rarefied elite environment that takes things literally, and acts in good faith.

I don't think this is psychopathic, as much as we're apes -- and speaking literally and in good faith about relatively abstract topics takes a considerable amount of training and is, in general, psychologically fragile (ie., its easy to be tilted).

▲brookst 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you’re having to look through layers and layers of jargon, misdirection, and plausible deniability to find the toxicity, is it possible there’s a roarscach element to it?

▲hypfer 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> If you’re having to look through layers and layers of jargon, misdirection, and plausible deniability to find the toxicity, is it possible there’s a roarscach element to it?

Are we going to play "prove me right" here? :D

Come on, this is just a direct personal attack. Go play better. Hide it with a more elaborate construct.

▲_matthew_ an hour ago | parent | next [-]

So I think I understand what hypfer's getting at, but I personally would never classify this sort of thing even remotely as "trolling".

@hypfer I'm curious, can you understand / identify with at least some of what I'm sharing below?:

A lot of people (likely near 100% of people) have their own internal beliefs about the world and they are largely commenting primarily to validate that belief (I am literally doing it with this comment). Like you often can see both what the person objectively wrote but then also get a feeling for some internal belief that motivated this specific comment.

And naturally, people are emotionally attached to their internal beliefs. And so sometimes comments are less a sharing of ideas and more a factually coded emotional rationalization of their internal beliefs. And when you read a comment like this that goes against one of your own beliefs, it may feel like an attack.

To me the distinction though is the motivation of the person on the other side. My interpretation is that true trolls have a motivation to incite emotions whereas most other people simply are trying to validate their own beliefs, despite potentially doing it in a way that is not emotionally palatable to all perspectives.

Separately, for you (hypfer), do you agree that there could be some amount of "hostile attribution bias" here? I saw this term while searching about this topic and to me it would explain both your perspective of feeling personally attacked and others perspective of feeling like that's actually not at all what's happening.

▲Arnt 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sometimes it can be difficult to tell whether someone is a troll "just asking questions" or actually just asking that question. More so on HN than in most of the world, I mean.

▲retromagik 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yep that's why the trolls lick that strategy

▲hypfer 4 hours ago | parent [-]

An interesting realisation there which I believe will shape the upcoming years of discussion spaces is that one can shift the burden of proof there.

Instead of leaving it with the moderation to prove without a doubt that someone is trolling, one can default to assume trolling and demand prove that it is not the case.

As it is impossible to bring up proof for either of those things, the house wins and people make damn sure to quintuple-check if their messaging is decent.

I don't think that that is a good solution, but the status quo was horrible, so maybe the pendulum swinging in another direction for a while might help us discover saner solutions.

▲cowlevel 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It works until trolls figure out how to prove they are not trolls, even though they are trolls, while non-trolls have difficulty proving it.

▲hypfer 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I suspect that the energy required scales exponentially though, and, eventually, it might just become less of a hassle to just behave.

That and the fact that each increase in difficulty filters out people that do not have the capability to pass it. So the pool shrinks every time.

Though, valid counterpoint: Eventually prefabs emerge and get shared.

But then we innovate once more. We always did. We always will

▲kalaksi 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Meanwhile, as said, well-meaning people get essentially harassed and silenced for allegedly being trolls if they are not aware of all the intricacies and differences in how people may view some words. Or they just make a mistake. That may push them away, but there will likely be room for different kinds of spaces and different kinds of cultures, just like today.

▲cowlevel 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It doesn't scale exponentially. Another user already gave the example of someone persistently using "he/she", talking about gay marriages as "partners" while straight ones are "husbands" and "wives", etc. How much effort do you think it takes to perform that versus to moderate it?

▲hypfer 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not quite sure what your point is tbh.

Do not even try?

▲cowlevel 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And that ambiguity is precisely something that trolls hide behind.

▲tacitusarc 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It seems likely this comment is a waste but… no, that clearly was not a personal attack, and going through life treating comments like those as personal attacks seems like a good way to be miserable.

▲hypfer 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> It seems likely this comment is a waste but… no, that clearly was not a personal attack, and going through life treating comments like those as personal attacks seems like a good way to be miserable.

I'm not sure if can truly let this pass as a more sophisticated construct, but I do appreciate the opener that already invalidates dismissal.

That's a good tactic. Thank you for playing.

I feel great btw :) Thank you for your concern.

▲kmijyiyxfbklao 4 hours ago | parent [-]

This is completely crazy. How could someone point out that assuming evil intentions is not a good way to interact with people without being accused of doing the same thing as the FBI telling MLK to kill himself?

▲hypfer 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> This is completely crazy. How could someone point out that assuming evil intentions is not a good way to interact with people without being accused of doing the same thing as the FBI telling MLK to kill himself?

I was genuinely wondering if we would see the end of it, but of course, no.

But I like this, because it's such an obvious strawman and bad faith reinterpration by an account consisting of random jumbled letters.

Thank you. This is background radiation one can live with. Thanks for making things normal again.

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲regretsresin 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Unlikely. Plenty of anti LGBTQ rhetoric is permissible here by mods, for example.

However, it often uses queer lingo - words that folks might think aren't notable, but queer folks will instantly recognize as an attack.

Refusing to call a gay man's husband a husband, but subsisting in friend or partner. Calling someone biologically male. Etc.

These get deployed quite subtly here, and because none of the words are slurs, they don't get moderated. (Though HN also permits overt slur usage -- search for the r-slur and you'll find plenty of cases.)

▲cosmic_cheese 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

FWIW, it may just be a colossal misconception of my own, but I’d been of the mind that “partner” was in some cases more polite to use because it doesn’t make assumptions about the individuals in question or about the dynamics of the relationship between them. I am not part of the LGBTQ world, however, and am happy to be corrected.

▲amanaplanacanal 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It can be used both ways, I suppose. I use it for my partner because legal marital status isn't important to me, but for those that had to fight to obtain the basic right to get married I can see why it would be hurtful.

I wonder how much of it is generational? I see something similar in the way second wave feminists rightly hated being called girls, whereas it's not as much of an issue for the younger generations because they didn't have those experiences.

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲hsuduebc2 44 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲MomsAVoxell 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Try to criticize the US' war machine as it relates to the US' tech industry, for example. You will incur the wrath of a thousand HN fascists.

Compare the actual human rights records of the Western sphere (war crimes, crimes against humanity, violations of human rights at massive scale) with those of the nations we are being taught are inferior: same effect.

Or for any of us who were around for the Snowden/Assange chapter of HN, who supported the effort to expose the US' heinous crimes - there are still massive sections of western culture who are fundamentalist in their superiority. You can find them in the downvoted and dead-flagged comments section.

▲pixelready 3 hours ago | parent [-]

This works the same way irl too. The US is one of the most heavily propagandized populations in history. You have to be talking to a very progressive, very politically savvy group to not constantly run into the usual knee jerk canned responses the second you bring up any criticism of military spending, foreign policy, or the panopticon. Probing of those responses in family or social settings for actual justification shows there’s no first principle reasoning behind them, just a vague unease about discussing the topics, like they’re sacrilege.

▲MomsAVoxell 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, the frothy-mouthed ideation of the US cultural identity is just as frustrating to have to contend with as any other ideology. I've met great Iranian folks and great American folks, and great Russians too - and what they all have in common is the ability to reflect on the limits of their own cultures.

▲0xDEAFBEAD an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>The US is one of the most heavily propagandized populations in history.

I see this statement repeated often with no supporting evidence. Seems a little ironic!

Is this claim falsifiable?

Would you be able to name the 2nd or 3rd most propagandized populations, in your view? Do you know anything about propaganda in e.g. the USSR or North Korea?

"Historian Sergo Mikoyan claimed that decades prior to the early 1960s, offices and stores had to submit papers with examples of their typewriters' typeface to local KGB branches so that any printed text could be traced back to the source, to prosecute those who had used the typewriter to produce material deemed illegal. With the introduction of photocopying machines, the KGB's Fifth Directorate and Agitprop Department required individuals to get authorization to use printing office photocopiers to prevent the mass production of unapproved material, though restrictions could be bypassed by bribing employees."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat

That's what an actual heavily-propagandized population looks like. Meanwhile, I can open up any social media app and be greeted by a sea of anti-American slop.